HUGHES' CASE.—1 BLAND. 39

It has been laid down as a clear law, that when a sheriff seizes
goods, by virtue of a fieri facias, to the value of the debt, the de-
fendant is actually discharged, though they are not sold; for the
plaintiff must depend upon his execution, and rely upon that; and
he has no further remedy against the defendant, but altogether
against the sheriff; and the defendant having lost his goods upon
an execution, which the plaintiff himself has chosen, the goods are
in the custody of the law, and the defendant discharged. Upon
similar principles, it may be regarded as a general rule in equity,
that where the property of a debtor has been sold, under a decree,
to pay his debt, and the report of the trustee, as finally ratified,
shews, that enough of the debtor's property has been taken and
sold to satisfy such claim fully, the debt, as relates to the debtor,
must be considered as satisfied; and no subsequent failure, from
any cause whatever, in collecting the full amount of the proceeds
of such sale, can justify the original creditor in again resorting to
his debtor, and making a further seizure, after his property had
been thus taken and sold to an amount equal to the debt. The
King v. Hopper, 3 Price, 40; Wilbraham v. Snow, 2 Saund. 47, n.
1; Cleric v. Withers, 2 Ld. Raym. 1072; S. C. 6 Mod. 299; Ex parte
Minor, 11 Ves. 559; Beatiy v, Chapline, 2 H. & J. 7.

Whereupon it is ordered, that the several receipts or assign-
ments of the respective representatives of the late Charles Penn,
Sen'r, be, and the same are hereby allowed in favor of the as-
signees claiming under them; and, that the trustees apply the pro-
ceeds as heretofore directed by the order of the 29th of January,
1823; and further, that the petition of John Hoye and others be,
and the same is hereby dismissed, with costs.

From this order there was an appeal, and the order was re-
versed by the Court of Appeals, at June Term, 1828.—Hoye v.
Penn, 2 H. & G. 477.

* HUGHES' CASE. 46
PARTITION.—STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

The form and mode of proceeding in Chancery, according to the Act of
Assembly, to obtain a division of an intestate's real estate among his
heirs, where the lands lie in different counties, (a)

Where an Act of Assembly authorizes an object to be attained, and the pre-
scribed course of attaining it is deficient, that of the forum resorted to

(a) Cited in Jenkins v. Simms, 45 Md. 537. See Rev. Code, Art. 47; Catlin
v. Catlin, 60 Md. 573; Chaney v. Tipton, 11 G. & J. 253: Carey's Forms, p.
584, et seq.