6IBBS VS. CUNNINGHAM. 45

of May, 1846. The bond was dated on the 29th of April, 1846, but was not
filed and approved until the 7th of July, following. HELD—
That, this bond having been approved by the Chancellor, as required by the decree,
it would be of dangerous consequence to say that the purchaser shall not get
the benefit of his purchase, if the bond for any reason is defective.

[This case was heard on exceptions to the sale made by the
trustee appointed to sell the lands of James Cunningham, de-
ceased, for payment of his debts. According to the, requi-
sitions of the decree under which he acted, the property was
first exposed at public sale, on the 8th September, 1846. The
bids were rejected by the trustee for insufficiency, but the ad-
vertisements in the papers were still continued by him. In-
quiries were afterwards made concerning the property of Duff
Green, as agent for certain other persons, and the trustee ex-
pressed his willingness to receive and consider any propositions
from him, but nothing further was heard from him, from that
time to the 24th of May, 1847; and it was on the 15th May,
1847, sold to Jacob Markell, at private sale, for $3000 in cash,
which price was deemed advantageous by the trustee, and
higher than what was offered at the public sale.

A portion of the lands of the deceased had been, in his life-
time, mortgaged to Henry Wayman and Richard G. Stockett;

and he had afterwards also executed a deed of trust to said Way-
man, who had refused to execute the trusts in any manner.

The ground taken by the third exception was, that there was
alleged to be an outstanding tax title in some purchaser, the
validity of which title was doubtful; a legal tender of the taxes,
and premium, and costs, had been made by the exceptant,
Wayman, to the tax purchaser, so as to entitle him to redeem
the lands, which was refused, whereby the title of the purchaser
was released, and the land re-invested in the former owners.
The exceptant stated his belief, that the trustee, at the time of
the sale, was ignorant of this tender and refusal.

The exceptions argued were filed by Wayman, and the
grounds upon which they were based will sufficiently appear
from the opinion of the Chancellor, who after stating the case
said:]