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 3, Page 510   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

510 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

sold, should be applied as a credit upon the judgment aforesaid,
in part payment of which it was received. The injunction was
granted as prayed. Whyte, the insolvent trustee, in his an-
swer to this bill, admits that the Bank became nominally in-
vested with a full title to said stalls; but in equity and good
conscience, was entitled to the same only as a security, by way
of mortgage for the debt due by Suter to the Bank, of $3,000;
and that the same passed to said Fisher as the agent of the
Bank, encumbered with the trust that the debt or loan afore-
said of $3,000 should be secured thereby, and that all beyond
that debt should enure to the benefit of Suter and his assigns;
and that respondent, as his permanent trustee, has the right
to administer the same in insolvency.
Afterwards, on the 21st of October, 1848, Whyte filed his
bill for an injunction restraining Fisher and his agents, or
assigns, from interfering in any way with said stalls or the
possession thereof.
This injunction was granted, and the two causes were
argued together, upon motions to dissolve the injunctions
granted in each.]
THE CHANCELLOR :
These cases have been argued together, and are so connected,
as, in the view of the counsel and the Court, to constitute but
one suit.
The pecuniary interest involved is inconsiderable, but the
questions which the cases present, are not unimportant. The
general rule ia too firmly established to be questioned, that no
matter how absolute a conveyance may be on its face, if the
intention is to take a security for a subsisting debt, or for
money lent, the transaction will be regarded as a mortgage,
and will be treated as such. Hicks vs. Sides, 5 Gill. & Johns.,
75; Dougherty vs. McColgan, 6 ibid, 27.5. And though the
defeasance was by an agreement resting in parol, still as
between the parties, the deed, though absolute on its face, will
be considered a mortgage, for parol evidence is admissible to
show that an absolute conveyance was intended as a mortgage,

  		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 3, Page 510   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