ANDREWS v. SCOTTON. 635

Chancellor conceives that Anderson must be discharged from his
present detention.

Whereupon it is Ordered, that Samuel Anderson be, and he is
hereby discharged, without costs, from any further detention under
the attachment by virtue whereof he has been brought before this
court.

And it is further Ordered, that the said Samuel Anderson pay
unto the said Ashur Foulke, the trustee, or bring into this court
the sum of $1,540, with interest thereon from the 28th day of
August, 1822, until paid or brought in, being the amount of the
purchase money of the land sold to him, as in the proceedings
mentioned, on the 17th day of April next, or shew good cause to
the contrary. Provided that a copy of this order, together with a
copy of the said petition of Foulke, filed on the 12th of January
last, be served on the said Anderson on or before the 25th instant.

By the answer of Anderson, on oath, filed on the 28th of March,
1826, shewing cause against this order, he states that the trustee,
as appeared by the agreement of the 28th of August, 1822, un-
dertook to make an absolute sale of the land, in violation of the
decree, by which any sale to be made by him required the confir-
mation of the Chancellor; that he, Anderson, was not returned as
the purchaser by the report of the trustee; that the quantity of
the land was not ascertained by the trustee's report; that the land
shewn to Anderson as the property to which the trustee could give
title differed materially from that which the trustee was authorized
to sell; that Anderson gave no bond or note for the payment of
the purchase money; nor has any been asked of him as was re-
quired by the decree; that he had never obtained possession of
the land, and believed that he could not obtain possession, it being
in the occupation of a certain Joseph Marriott; that he, Anderson,
was unable to comply with the terms of the sale, and that he could
not, in equity, be compelled to execute the contract; or, if the
trustee thought otherwise, he should file his bill in equity, or sue
at law for the purchase money, when the whole case might be fully
investigated, the rights of the parties conclusively established, and
complete justice done to both.

By consent of parties, it was Ordered, on the 17th of April,
1826, that the matter stand for hearing on the first Wednesday of
May then next.

12th May, 1826.—BLAND, Chancellor.—This matter standing