SUPREME COURT OF THE CANAL ZONE.

iout proof or showing as to any funds or estate of the judgment debtor in the possession or care of the Panama Railroad Company. In making such order the court ruled that the Panama Railroad Company should be given one week to show cause why such conditional judgment should not be made final. On November 18, 1909, with but special or limited appearance noted of record, the garnishee defendant moved the court to quash the return which purported service upon it. This motion the court denied. The company then moved to set aside the order of conditional judgment, which motion was also denied; and the garnishee defendant then offered and filed its answer. The answer denied that at the time of the original service, to wit, October 30, 1909, such garnishee defendant had within the Canal Zone any property, money, or credits of the original defendant Frank Raymond. On November 26, 1909, defendant Raymond filed an affidavit asking and seeking all rights of personal exemption as accorded under section 506, page 113, of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Canal Zone. On December 2, 1909, following a continuance to that date, the proceedings supplementary were called for hearing; the parties litigant were present by counsel. Following the call of the case, the court, of its own motion and without pleading, motion, or request from attorneys or litigants, ordered that the answer of the Panama Railroad Company be stricken from the files, and entered a rule on the garnishee defendant to further answer within one week and show cause why the conditional judgment should not be made final. On December 9, 1909, or at the expiration of the time prescribed, the case was called, and the court ordered that the conditional judgment be made final, for the reason that the garnishee defendant had failed to answer the written interrogatories. This final judgment, following in the footsteps of the one denominated conditional, was entered and ordered in the absence of proof or showing of any nature as to funds or estate of Frank Raymond in the possession or care of the garnishee defendant. From the record, it appears that during the tendency of the entire garnishment proceedings, no evidence was offered and in fact no testimony given of any nature before the court, save and except on November 2, 1909, when one Noltee, agent of the garnishee defendant, with office at Gatun, C. Z., and on whom the purported service as against the Panama Railroad Company had been made, was called by the plaintiff and examined as to his duties and position with the Panama Railroad Company, but in no way interrogated as to his knowledge of funds or estate

so