HOFFMAN v. JOHNSON.

In cases of this sort, the exertion of every reasonable and proper
degree of diligence is within the express terms and meaning of
the contract And, after all such proper efforts have been made,
before payment can be enforced from the surety, equity and justice
require, that the bonds, notes, or judgments, or all the securities
he had placed in the hands of his creditor, or enabled him to pro-
cure, should be returned, or reassigned, so as to put it in the power
of the debtor or surety to obtain reimbursement from the funds
which he had represented as sufficient, and which his creditor had
shewn that he was unable to render available, (f) Such are the
principles of equity applicable to this case: let us now review the
facts.

It appears that Hole's bond was payable on the 23d September,
1786; that it was given to secure the payment of the purchase
money of a certain lot of land, which was held bound for the pay-
ment of this debt, by an equitable lien; and, which lien there is
strong reason to believe, continued unimpaired down to the year
1807. At May term, 1793, of the General Court, the assignee
obtained judgment against Hole on this bond; on which judgment
a ca. sa. was issued, returnable to May term, 1794, and there the
judicial proceedings appear to have ended. Hole petitioned for
the benefit of the insolvent law, in April, 1794; yet, it does not
appear that he obtained a complete discharge under any insolvent
law until 1802. Not even an offer has been made by the holder of
this bond, given by Hole, at any time, to return it, or to transfer
the judgment obtained on it to the vendee. From all these circum-
stances it is considered, that the vendee is entirely discharged from
all responsibility for this debt of Hole's. If it has been lost, it has
been owing to the laches of the vendor; and, therefore, the vendee
ought not any longer to be held answerable.

The bond of William Benner, it appears, became due on the
1st of January, 1786; and he died on the 10th August, 1793. It
was generally reported, that he was, shortly before his death,
entirely insolvent; but that he left some personal estate, is certain.
The vendor or assignee, brought suit on his bond, and obtained
judgment against him, in the General Court, in May, 1793, on
which a ca. sa. was issued, returnable to October, 1793. From

(f) Kearslake v. Morgan, 5 T. R. 513; King v. Baldwin, 17 John. Rep. 384;
Hayes v. Ward, 4 John. C. C. 123; Eddowes v. Niell, 4 Dall. 133; Clark v. Young,
1 Cran. 192; Harris v. Johnston, 3 Cran. 311; Ex parte Mure, 2 Cox. 63; Williams v.
Price, 1 Sim. & Stu. 531.