488 WATKINS v. WORTHINGTON.—2 BLAND;

In the majority of cases it would be impracticable or difficult to procure any
other proof of insolvency than that of general reputation in that part of
the country where the debtor resides and is known, (d)

The rules of equity in bankruptcy as applicable in a creditor's suit.

It is not within the scope of the judicial authority to diminish the force of
a contract; and the Legislature has been restrained from passing any
law impairing the obligation of contracts.

A man may make use of all the securities he has. until he has obtained
satisfaction of his whole debt.

As to proof of the nature of the contract, whether the deceased was prin-
cipal or surety; or the insolvency of a co-obligor.

The assignee of a chose in action takes it subject to all the equity to which it
was liable in the hands of the original holder; the exceptions to this rule.

THIS hill was filed on the 9th of July, 1825, by Nicholas Wat-
kins and Adam and John Miller, against Christiana M. Worthing-
ton, * Nicholas Wor thing-ton, Erice I. Worthington, Mary
510 W. Worthington and Betty Worthington. The bill sets
out, that the plaintiffs sue in behalf of themselves and others,
creditors of Beale M. Worthiugton, deceased; that the deceased
died indebted to the plaintiff Watkiris in the sum of $234.04, with
interest from the 9th of February, 1824, on a note under seal; and
unto the plaintiff's Adam and John Miller on a similar instrument
of writing in the sum of $397.17, with interest from the 1st of
April, 1824; that the just debts of the deceased were very large,
and that his personal estate was totally insufficient to discharge
them; that the deceased died intestate, and George Wells, Sr.
had obtained letters of administration on his personal estate; and
that the deceased had left a widow Elizabeth E. Worthington, and
the defendants his children and heirs, all of whom were minors.
Whereupon the bill prayed, that the real estate left by the de-
ceased might be sold for the payment of bis debts; and that the
plaintiffs might have such other and further relief as the nature of
their case might require.

On the 1st of November, 1820, the infant defendants answered
by their guardian and said, that they had no knowledge of the
matters stated in the bill, and submitted to such decree as the
Chancellor should tliink proper to make.

On the 9tli of March, 1827, The President, Directors and Com-
pany of the; Farmers Bank of Maryland, by their petition stated,
that they were creditors of the said Beale M. Worthington, de-
ceased, to a very large amount, and could only be paid out of the
proceeds of the sale of his real estate. Whereupon they prayed to
be permitted to come in as parties complainants, and to substanti-
ate their claims as might be required.

(d) Approved in Griffith v. Parks, 32 Md. 4.