312 CHASE v. MANHARDT.—1 BLAND.

fendant himself could not be overruled by any thing he had alleged as
being, in his opinion, a correct conclusion of law from them, (a)

Where there is an agreement to allow for payments, or a verdict has been
taken by surprise or mistake, it furnishes a ground for the interference
of a Court of equity; but if the mistake can be corrected in this Court,
a new trial at law will not be ordered, (b)

Where it is admitted by the answer, that there still remains a dispute be-
tween the parties, the injunction is always continued until the final
hearing, (c)

Where in a contract between A and B alone, A stipulated to pay a sum of
money to B, upon condition, that he made an assignment of certain
property to A, and delivered the assignment to C, before a certain day;
it was held, that A was to be considered as the contracting party, who
alone could dispense with the condition.

Where a party bound himself to secure the payment of money, by giving
his notes payable so many days after date, but failed to do so; it was
held, that the debt should bear interest from the time the notes, had they
been given, would have fallen due.

Interest is paid for the use or forbearance of money; and therefore, where
a debtor is prevented by law from making payment, or cannot pay, be-
cause of any public calamity, such, as that of a public war, he will not
be charged with interest, (d)

But an attachment laid in his lands, as a garnishee, does not prevent him
from bringing the money into Court so as to stop interest; and there-
fore, if, as garnishee, he contests the plaintiff's claim, either in his own
right, or as an ally of the defendant, he will be charged with interest, (e)

If a creditor, in any manner, receives only the principal of his debt, so as
not to relinquish his claim to the interest then due, he may afterwards
recover the interest as if it were a part of the principal.

In some cases, a party may be relieved from the consequences of a fraud
which has been practised upon a third person.

This bill was filed on the 30th of December, 1818, by Samuel
Chase against Christian L. Manhardt, and others; in which it is
alleged, that the defendant Manhardt had obtained a judgment
against James Bryden for a large sum of money, upon which he
had sued out an attachment, and had it laid in the hands of this
plaintiff Chase, as garnishee of the defendant Bryden; upon which
attachment Manhardt had, by surprise and fraud, obtained a judg-
ment of condemnation against the plaintiff for an amount which
he did not owe to Bryden. Whereupon the plaintiff prayed for an
injunction to stay execution upon the judgment, and for such relief

(a) See Salmon v. Clagett, 3 Bland, 125.

(6) As to the jurisdiction of equity in cases of mistake, see Wood v. Pat-
terson, 4 Md. Ch. 335.
(c) See Lynch v. Colegate, 2 H. & J. 34, note (a}.

(d) See Paul v. Christie, 4 H. & McH. 161, note.

(e) Cited in Smith v. Anderson, 18 Md. 528. where it was held that when a
party admits his liability to contribution, and offers to pay his share into
Court, and thus exempt himself from further interest and costs, he should
be allowed to do so.