216 ATTACHMENTS. [ART. 9

For a failure of proof that the defendant is about to abscond and that he
has assigned, etc., his property with intent to defraud his creditors, see
Duniay v. Sanchez, 71 Md. 513; Clark v. Meixsell, 29 Md. 230.

For a failure of proof that the debt was fraudulently contracted, the
attachment being laid in the hands of a trustee for the benefit of creditors,
see Strauss v. Hose, 59 Md. 533; Clark v. Meixsell, 29 Md. 229.

For proof that the debt was fraudulently contracted, see Dumay v. Sanchez,
71 Md. 514; Thomas v. Brown, 67 Md. 520.

Generally.

An attachment can be maintained before the maturity of the debt, where
the affidavit avers that the debt was fraudulently contracted. Summers v.
Oberndorf, 73 Md. 316.

But where the foundation of the attachment is that the defendant has
assigned, etc., his property, with intent to defraud his creditors, and it is
not alleged that the debt was fraudulently contracted, the plaintiff, having
attached before the maturity of the debt, can not uphold the atachment on
the ground that it was fraudulently contracted. Dellone v. Hull, 47 Md. 116.

Although a debt may have been fraudulently contracted, if prior to the
attachment the debtor has made a valid deed of trust for the benefit of his
creditors, the attachment can not affect property in the trustee's hands.
This section is only a remedial act; it gives the creditor no lien, but only a
more speedy remedy. Horwltz v. Ellinger, 31 Md. 492. See also, May v.
Buckhannon Lumber Co., 70 Md. 448.

The rule day act of Baltimore city is not applicable to attachment cases.
Sanborn v. Mullen, 77 Md. 480.

An attachment may be issued under this section against the property of a
defendant alleged to have stolen money from the plaintiff. The term "Indebt-
ed," as used in the attachment law, if not to be construed technically, or in
a strict legal sense. The plaintiff's claim may be upon an implied contract.
Downs v. Baltimore. 111 Md. 692.

And see notes to sec. 40.

1904, art. 9, sec. 37. 1888, art 9, sec. 36. 1864, ch. 306, sec. 2.
37. At the time of making said affidavit the plaintiff shall produce
the bond, account or other evidence of the debt, by which said debtor is
indebted, and the same shall be filed among the papers in the cause.
See notes to sec. 4.

Ibid. sec. 38. 1888. art. 9. sec. 37. 1864, ch. 306, sec. 3. 1888, ch. 507.

38. There shall be issued with every attachment issued under the
provisions of the two preceding sections, a writ of summons against the
defendant, as is usual in actions at law. The action shall be instituted
either in the county where the defendant resides or where the property
proposed to be attached may be located or found, or where the proposed
garnishee resides; but if the action be instituted in any county other
than that wherein the defendant resides, the writ of summons against
the defendant shall be directed to the sheriff of the county wherein the
defendant resides, returnable to the court in which the action shall be
brought.

Ibid. sec. 39. 1888. art. 9, sec. 38. 1894, ch. 104.

39. Every clerk before issuing an attachment under the preceding
section shall take from the plaintiff or some person on his behalf bond
to the State of Maryland, with security, to be approved by said clerk,
in double the sum alleged to be due by the defendant or defendants,
conditioned for satisfying all costs which may be awarded to such