|
|
|
|
|
|
|
212 WILLIAMS' CASE.
incumbrances upon the estate, that it may be sold on a shorter
credit, or for such a proportion of cash as may be necessary to
clear off any then existing incumbrances, as dower, mortgages and
the like.
The court can have no objection to an alteration of the terms of
sale as proposed by the trustee; but in order to prevent a sale of
the estate, at public auction, for less than its value; the trustee
must fix a price, or have a reserved bid for the benefit of the
infants. Under ordinary circumstances, where property is offered
for sale at auction to the highest bidder, it is held at law, though
doubted in equity, to be a violation of the terms of such an agree-
ment, and a fraud upon the sale and the public to take advantage
of the eagerness of bidders by screwing up the price by means of
a puffer or bye-bidder; (a) nor can a purchaser, on the other hand,
be allowed to depreciate the value of an estate intended to be
sold, (b) But, to prevent a sale of the property for less than its
value, where the sale is not made for the payment of debts; but
merely to effect a division; and particularly, in cases like this,
where the object is a conversion of the property as necessary for
the interest and advantage of infants, or of persons non compos
mentis, it has been the practice here, as in England, to allow a
reserved bid for the benefit of the owners, and to authorize the
trustee to employ a bye-bidder accordingly, (c)
(a) Bexwell v. Christie, Cowp. 395; Howard v. Castle, 6 T. R. 642; Crowder
v. Austin, 13 Com. Law Rep. 11; Moncrieff v. Goldsborough, 4 H. & McH. 282;
Bramley v. Alt, 3 Ves. 620; Conolly v. Parsons, 3 Ves. 625, note; Townshend v.
Stangroom, 6 Ves, 338; Smith v. Clarke, 12 Ves, 477.—(b) Sug. Ven. Pur. 16;
Doolin v. Ward, 6 John. Rep. 194.—(c) Conolly v. Parsons, 3 Ves. 625, note;
Smith v. Clarke, 12 Ves. 477; Jervoise v. Clarke, 1 Jac. & Wal. 389; Brooker v.
Collier, 3 Cond. Cha. Rep. 439; Shelf, on Lunatics, 366, 368.
KILTY v. QUYNN.—This bill was filed on the 4th of June, 1804, by John Kilty
against John Quynn, and Kitty, Betsey, William, Allen, and Casper Quynn,the five
infant children of Allen Quynn, Junior, deceased, and John Gassaway, a minor, and
Eliza Gassaway, children of Polly Gassaway, deceased. The bill stated that Allen
Quynn the elder being seised in fee simple of certain tracts, lots, and parcels of land,
made his last will according to law and died, by which will he devised, with some
particular dispositions, the whole of his estate, the one-fourth part to his son, the
defendant John Quynn; one other fourth part to his son-in-law this plaintiff; one
other fourth part to the infant defendants the children of his late son Allen Quynn,
Junior; and the other fourth part to his grandchildren the defendants John Gassa-
way and Eliza Gassaway, son and daughter of his late daughter Polly Gassaway;
and appointed this plaintiff and John Gassaway his executors. That some of these
devisees being minors, a division could not be effected without the interposition of
this court, and without a sale of the property thus devised to them. Whereupon it
was prayed, that a sale might be ordered; & division made; and that the plaintiff
might have such relief as was suited to the nature of bis case, &c.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
