It is provided in Ontario by the Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1914, c. 121, ss. 53, 63, 64 and 65, as follows:

53. On the administration of the estate of a deceased person, in the case of a deficiency of assets, debts due to the Crown and to the personal representative of the deceased person, and debts to others, including therein debts by judgment or order, and other debts of record, debts by specialty, simple contract debts, and such claims for damages as are payable in like order of administration as simple contract debts shall be paid pari passu and without any preference or priority of debts of one rank or nature over those of another; but nothing heroin shall prejudice any lien existing during the lifetime of the debtor on any of his real or personal property.

(w) Nelson v. Page, 1868, L.R. 7 Eq. 25. Illustrations of insufficient signification of a "contrary or other intention" are afforded by In re Newmarch, Newmarch v. Storr, 1878, 9 Ch.D. 12; In re Rossiter, Rossiter v. Rossiter, 1879, 13 Ch.D. 355; Elliott v. Dears-ley, 1880, 16 Ch.D. 322; In re Smith, Hannington v. True, Giles v. True, 1886, 33 Ch.D. 195; Mason v. Mason, 1887, 13 O.R. 725. In the following cases the intention was held to be sufficiently expressed: In re Fleck, Colston v. Roberts, 1888, 37 Ch.D. 677; In re Campbell, Campbell v. Campbell, [1893] 2 Ch. 206; In re Valpy, [1906] 1 Ch. 531.

(x) In re Fleck, Colston v. Roberts, supra.

(y) Re Le Brun, 1916, 36 O.L.R. 135, 28 D.L.R. 386.

(z) Scott v. Supple, 1893, 23 O.R. 393.

Under this section foreign creditors are entitled to payment pari passu with Ontario creditors (a).

63.- (1) On the administration of the estate of a deceased person, in case of a deficiency of assets, every creditor in proving his claim shall state whether he holds any security for his claim or any part thereof, and shall give full particulars of the same, and if such security is on the estate of the deceased debtor or on the estate of a third person for whom the estate of the deceased debtor is only indirectly or secondarily liable the creditor shall put a specified value on such security, and the personal representative, under the authority of the other creditors of the estate of the deceased, or of the court if the estate is being then administered under the direction of or by a court, may either consent to the creditor's ranking for the claim, after deducting such valuation, or may require from the creditor an assignment of the security at an advance of ten per cent. upon the specified value to be paid out of the estate as soon as the personal representative has realized such security, in which he shall be bound to the exercise of ordinary diligence; and in either case the difference between the value at which the security is retained or taken, as the case may be, and the amount of the claim of the creditor shall be the amount for which he shall rank upon the estate of the deceased debtor.

(2) If the claim of the creditor is based upon a negotiable instrument upon which the estate of the deceased debtor is only indirectly or secondarily liable, and which is not mature or exigible, the creditor shall be considered to hold security within the meaning of this section, and shall put a value on the liability of the person primarily liable thereon, as his security for the payment thereof, but after the maturity of such liability and its non-payment, he shall be entitled to amend and re-value his claim.

64. A creditor holding any such security on the estate of a do-ceased debtor, or on the estate of a third person for whom the estate of such debtor is only indirectly or secondarily liable, may release or deliver up such security to the personal representative, or he may, by statutory declaration delivered to the personal representative, set a value upon such security; and from the time he shall have so released or delivered up such security or valued the same the debt to which such security applied shall be considered as an unsecured debt of the estate, or as being secured only to the extent of the value set upon such security; and the creditor may rank and exercise all the rights of an ordinary creditor for the amount of his -claim, or to the extent only of so much thereof as exceeds the value set upon such security as the case may be.

(a) Milne v. Moore, 1894, 24 O.R. 456, following In re Kloebe, Kannreuther v. Geiselbrecht, 1884, 28 Ch.D. 175. Under an assignment for the general benefit of creditors, the crown has no priority over other creditors. Clarkson v. Attorney-General of Canada, 1889, 16 O.A.R. 202.

65.- (1) Where a person claiming to be entitled to rank on the estate holds security for.his claim or any part thereof, of such a nature that he is required by this Act to value it, and he fails to value the same, the Judge of the Surrogate Court who granted the probate or letters of administration may, upon summary application by the personal representative, of which application three days' notice shall be given to such claimant, order that unless a specified value shall be placed on such security and notified in writing to the personal representative within a time to be limited by the order such claimant shall, in respect of the claim, or the part thereof for which the security is held, be wholly barred of any right to share in the proceeds of such estate.

(2) If a specified value is not placed on such security and notified in writing to the personal representative according to the exigency of the order, or within such further time as the Judge may allow, the claim or the part thereof, as the case may be, shall be wholly barred as against such estate.

(3) Where an estate is being administered by or under the direction of a court such court shall exercise the jurisdiction conferred by this section upon the Judge of the Surrogate Court.

Provisions similar to ss. 63 and 65 of the Trustee Act are contained in the Assignments and Preferences Act, R.S.O. 1914, c. 134, s. 25, sub-ss. 4, 5, 6, and 1(b). The provisions of the Trustee Act in question were first enacted in Ontario in 1896 (c), and their effect was to adopt in the administration of the estates of insolvent deceased persons the English bankruptcy practice in place of the former English Chancery practice (d). In the English Court of Chancery, according to what is commonly known as the rule in Mason v. Blogg (e), a secured creditor might prove against the general estate of his deceased debtor for the whole of his debt and realize his security as well, provided he did not get more than twenty shillings in the pound (f).

(b) The effect of the latter provisions is discussed in Cassels, Ontario Assignments Act, 4th ed., pp. 130 ff.

(c) 59 V. c. 22, an Act respecting the Estates of Insolvent Deceased Persons.

(d) In England the bankruptcy practice was made applicable to the administration of estates of deceased persons by s. 10 of the Judicature Act of 1875, and in Ontario was in substance adopted as the rule under voluntary assignments for the general benefit of creditors in 1885 by 48 V. c. 26, s. 18.

(e) 1837, 2 My. & Cr. 443; Eastman v. Bank of Montreal, 1885, 10 O.R. 78.

(f) See Maitland, Equity and the Forms of Action, pp. 194, 195,. 203 ff.