MURDOCK'S CASE.—2 BLAND. 443

directed to set off the purchase money against so much of his, the
plaintiff's, claim, except the commissions which he had paid, and
that Elizabeth Murdock, the defendant, who held the property,
might be ordered to deliver it up to him.

BLAND, C., 10th October, 1828.—Ordered, that the account be-
tween the purchaser and the trustee be adjusted as prayed. And
it is further ordered, that the said Elizabeth Murdock forthwith
deliver the possession of the property in the petition mentioned,
unto the said William Brewer, or shew good cause to the contrary,
on the 23rd instant. Provided that a copy of this order, together
with a copy of the foregoing petition, be served on the said Eliza-
beth on or before the 14th instant.

No cause having been shewn, an injunction to deliver possession
was ordered and issued; which having been returned, but not hav-
ing been obeyed, on the 31st of October, 1828. a habere facias pos-
sessionem was, on motion, ordered, by virtue of which, the pur-
chaser was put into actual possession.

The trustee further reported that he had sold forty-four acres of
land, being another parcel of the mortgaged property, upon con-
dition that if the purchaser did not pay, as required on the day of
*the ratification of the sale, that the next highest bidder

should be considered as the purchaser, and that he had sold 465

to Elizabeth Murdock, the defendant, as the highest bidder, and
William Brewer, the plaintiff, as the next highest bidder. Upon
which, the usual order nisi was passed: which having been pub-
lished, the matter was submitted.

BLAND, C., 20th January, 1829.—While on the one hand, this
Court has allowed to a trustee, in some respects, a greater range
of discretion in making sales under a decree than is granted to a
master in Chancery in England: Gibson's Case, 1 Bland, 144; so,
on the other hand, it has, as occasion seemed to require, guarded
such sales with more precautionary restrictions than have ever
been adopted by the English Court. This Court will not suffer its
proceedings to be delayed or perverted in any way whatever;
Deaver v. Reynolds, 1 Bland, 50; and therefore, where it has ascer-
tained that a person who had been reported by a trustee as the
highest bidder had been unable to comply with his bid, or had
conducted himself fraudulently, or had attempted to baffle the
Court; upon a re-sale, the trustee has been ordered to reject the bid
of such person altogether. And so too where there is just reason to
believe, that some one or more persons intend to outbid all others,
and cause themselves to be reported as purchasers, with a design
to embarrass the Court, or to delay the plaintiff in the recovery of
his claim; or who having no ostensible means of paying the pur-