CAPE SABLE COMPANY'S CASE.—3 BLAND. 635

so advised, he instituted a suit in Baltimore County Court, upon
which he obtained that judgment on which he now relies; the pro-
ceedings upon which have been stayed by the injunction in this
case.

This last judgment of the 26th of May, 1824, was also assailed
by these plaintiffs upon the ground of its having been illegally and
fraudulently confessed, with an intention, that it should operate
as a lien, or mortgage upon the property of the company; and of
its being about to be used as a means of having their whole prop-
erty takin in execution and sold, so as to sacrifice the interests of
the plaintiffs; and thus, indirectly to thrust them out from all con-
nection or concern with the body politic. These allegations of the
plaintiffs, on the motion to dissolve the injunction, appeared to be
sufficiently sustained to have that restriction continued until the
final hearing or further order.

But since the passing of that order, continuing the injunction,
much testimony has been taken; and the result has been, that the
plaintiffs have totally abandoned the original cause of their com-
plaint. And first, by the decree of the 8th of March, allowed
their bill to be dismissed; and then, by the decree of the 5th of
April, consented, that all the estate of the Cape Sable Company,
the protection of their interests in which was the sole object of
their suit, should be sold for the satisfaction of this claim of Oli-
ver's, among others, against that company. Hence, although, it
may be true, that this last judgment may have been confessed
with an intention that it should operate as a mortgage; and with-
out the consent of three-fourths of the stockholders owning three-
fourths of the shares; yet the assent to the decree in this case
amounts to a virtual and clear relinquishment of that objection.
and to an admission, that this judgment, upon which Oliver now
* relies, is entirely correct. But as this provision of the Act
of incorporation, requiring the assent of three-fourths of the 659
stockholders owning three-fourths of the shares, was intended
exclusively for the benefit of stockholders, there are no other per-
sons than these plaintiffs, or some other stockholders, competent
to make such an objection. Here, however, all parties have con-
sented to this decree; and, consequently, this judgment of Robert
Oliver, of the 26th of May, 1824, must now be considered as alto-
gether well founded and conclusive.

Charles Carroll also claims as a judgment creditor of the Cape
Sable Company; and his claims, as No. 2. 3, 4 and 5, have been
opposed by objections similar to those directed against that of
Robert Oliver. But as Carroll's claim as a judgment creditor has
been, in like manner, put in issue, as fully investigated, and as
effectually established by the decree of the 5th of April, as that
of Oliver, it cannot be now again made the subject of litigation