Bankrupt's Insurance Policies sured does not survive the endowment period.7 This has been questioned, however. In Atkins v. Equitable, 132 Mass. 395, the court held that a paid up endow ment policy did not pass to the trus tee because the wife of the bankrupt had an interest in it of which she could not be deprived. The same result was reached in Haskell v. Equitable, 181 Mass. 341. In that case the bankrupt's policy provided for the payment of the insurance to him at the end of twenty years from its date; if he died within the period, payment was to be made to his mother if living otherwise to his estate. The court agreed with the fed eral courts' decisions in Re Slinguff 106, Fed. Rep. 154 and Re Boardman 103, Fed. Rep. 783, that the bankrupt had a valuable interest in the policy which passed to the trustee, but held that this could not deprive the beneficiary of her right, and that without her con sent the trustee could not recover, the cash surrender value which he sued for. In Bailey v. Wood, 202 Mass. 562, the policies in question were also of the endowment kind. After a careful re view of the law the court upheld the Massachusetts statute exempting poli cies payable to a married woman. A third endowment policy on the life of the same bankrupt in which the death benefit had been assigned originally to his sister and on her decease to the daughter of the bankrupt was treated differently. The bankrupt was insol vent when he made the transfer to his daughter. He was furthermore the sole owner of the legal and beneficial inter ests in the policy, by virtue of his in heritance as heir of his sister, the first assignee. The daughter could not claim 7 Re Lange 91 Fed. Rep. 361; Re Welling. 113 Fed. Rep. ISO.
423
the benefit of the statute, and the transfer was held void against the creditors. So also in Re Boos, 154 Fed. Rep. 494, the Pennsylvania statute which pro vided that "all policies of life insurance or annuities on the life of any person which may hereafter mature and which have been or shall be taken out for the benefit of or bona fide assigned to the wife or children or any relative, etc., shall be ... free and clear from all claims of the creditors of such person," was held to include endowment policies, and the authority of Holden v. Stratton, supra, was made on the ground for the decision. A contrary view was taken by another Pennsylvania judge in Re Herr, 182 Fed. Rep 716 and the court claimed in that decision that the weight of authority was in favor of the trus tee's taking where endowment policies were concerned. But it may be that the court was desirous of finding such authority, as the bankrupt Herr had been found in contempt only two days before on other issues. In Re Herr, 182 Fed. Rep. 715. On the insurance branch of the case the court said, "It is true that if the bankrupt died today the money due on the policy would belong to his wife. But it is also true that at once upon the discharge of the present rule, the bankrupt could eliminate her by the designation of a new beneficiary and get the surrender value of the policy which the trustee therefore by the terms of the statute is entitled to claim." The judge proceeds too rapidly. The trustee is not concerned with what the bankrupt may do with property or powers of appointment after the adjudi cation; his rights are fixed as of the time of adjudication, and the trustee's rights are not even sufficient to support an insurable interest. If the technical structure of a life in
