| Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 20 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
20 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY. being no more than the exercise of his common law right to secure one creditor to the exclusion of others. It has already been stated that some short time before the transfers were made to Jerome, Thomas had proposed to his creditors to make an assignment for their common and equal benefit, provided they would release him, and that they or some of them refusing, he transferred to Jerome. But he says in his answer that he did not expect to be compelled to petition, as his debts, exclusive of that due Jerome, were so small, he did not think his creditors would force him to take the benefit of the insolvent laws, but he believed they would give him time, and save him from that necessity. This may have been an unreasonable expectation on the part of Thomas, but is it so improbable and unnatural as to justify the Court in concluding that he did not entertain it, though, under the solemn sanction of an oath, he says he did. His debts, exclu- sive of that due Mr. Jerome, did not exceed $600, and it may be in view of his relations between them, which appear to have been of the most friendly character, that he looked to Mr. Je- rome to put him in a way to satisfy them. It would be vain to attempt to deny that there are strong circumstances of sus- picion in this case, and but for the explicit denial of the answer of Thomas upon the point of intention, I should have con- cluded, from all the circumstances, that he intended to do that which seems to me would necessarily follow from his conduct. It was unquestionably calculated to incense his creditors, and be might well have supposed that they would resort to coercive measures against him, and that in that event the insolvent laws were his only refuge from imprisonment. But he swears otherwise, and I do not find in the facts and circumstances, those strong and controlling considerations which should over- throw what a party says upon oath in regard to his own inten- tions. The next inquiry is, whether the transfer was made under circumstances which bring it within the provisions of the first section of the Act of 1834, ch. 293 ? And with regard to this question, I should answer it at once in the affirmative, and de- |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
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 4, Page 20 View pdf image (33K) |
|
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.
Maryland State Archives