394 THE FARMERS BANK OF MARYLAND'S CASE.

defendant Rezin and his children; and a part of that which had
been devised to the plaintiff George W. Hammond. These sales
were all finally ratified, and the proceeds having been collected,
were applied in full satisfaction of all the creditors of the testator;
the contributions charged upon the several devisees were finally
adjusted, and the estate entirely cleared and settled.

THE FARMERS BANK OF MARYLAND'S CASE.

That clause of the act incorporating The Farmers' Bank of Maryland, which de-
clares that all debts actually due to the company by a stockholder offering to
transfer, must be discharged before such transfer shall be made, gives to the bank
a mortgage or pledge of such stock.—The bank, as a mortgagee, may sell such
stock without suit; but if it fails or refuses to do so, on a bill filed by the admi-
nistrator of the deceased stockholder, it may be ordered to be sold.

THIS bill was filed on the 19th of November, 1829, by John W.
Duvall, administrator of William Warfield, deceased, against The
President, Directors and Company of the Farmers Bank of Ma-
ryland. The bill states, that the plaintiff's intestate, at the time of
his death, held, in his own name, seven shares of stock in the insti-
tution of the defendants, on each of which fifty dollars had been
paid; that after his death the defendants brought suit, and recovered
judgment against the plaintiff, as administrator of the said intes-
tate, to bind a due proportion of assets, which had or might come
to hand; that the personal estate of the intestate would not be suf-
ficient to pay his debts; that the plaintiff is entitled to the said
stock, or at least to a credit for the value thereof, on account of
the said judgment; that he has applied to the defendants for pay-
ment of the dividends on the stock thus belonging to his intestate,
and for permission to transfer it to any one willing to purchase;
and also, demanded that he should be credited on said judgment at
the par or market value thereof, together with the dividends which
have accrued thereon, all which has been refused by the defen-
dants, who claim it as forfeited; and also claim a dividend of the
assets of the intestate, without discounting therefrom the value of
the said shares of stock and the dividends thereon. Whereupon,
the bill prayed for such a decree as to the court might seem just
and equitable.

On the 28th of January, 1830, the defendants put in their an-