clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search		 search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 514   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

514 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
It is not insisted, by the defendant's counsel, that the usury
which he charges against the second mortgage, fastens itself
to, and infects the prior one. The latter is conceded to be a
valid security, and the objection to the mortgage last executed,
is, that it is wholly void, because given without any legal con-
sideration to support it.
It appears, by an agreement between the plaintiff and Mason,
executed on the 23d of September, 1846, that the latter agreed
to constitute the plaintiffs bis agents, for the term of two
years, for the sale of cotton sail duck, to be manufactured at
the factory, then about to be put in operation, and for their ser-
vices so to be rendered, and in lieu of all other compensation,
or commissions. Mason agreed to pay them the sum of $3,000
per annum. And it was further stipulated, in consideration of
the terms and conditions in the said agreement contained, to be
performed on the part of the complainants, that if he. Mason,
from any cause, should neglect, or fail to appoint, and put in
possession of the said agency, the said complainants, that then,
and in that case, he should forfeit, and pay to them, the sum
of $6,000, in equal quarterly payments, until the whole shall
be paid, commencing from the 1st day of March next, so that
they shall receive the same consideration as if they had acted
as agents."
And it is in evidence, brought out by the cross examination
of Henry A. Barling, a witness produced by the complainants,
that the notes mentioned in, and secured by the second mort-
gage, were given for commissions, which were to be paid to
the complainants, in default of Mason's placing in their hands
certain goods, manufactured by him, for sale at the factory.
The same witness proved, in the examination in chief, that
Mason sent the complainants no goods, because they were not
in their line of business, and that consignments of them were
made to other persons for sale, and he likewise proved, that the
notes spoken of by him upon the cross examination, were given
in pursuance of the agreement of the 23d of September, 1846,
already spoken of.
It seems, therefore, to be quite apparent, from the proof of
his witness, that no valuable consideration was paid by the

  		clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 514   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives