Volume 9 — Gill & Johnson's Maryland Reports

This was an action of debt commenced on the 19th February, 1831, on the testamentary bond of Andrew Shriver, to perform the office of executor of the last will and testament of John Shultz, late of Baltimore county, deceased.

This was an action of debt, instituted on the 21st day of September, 1833, and was founded on a bond bearing date the 18th January, 1832, sealed by the said H. L. Harrison, William Graham, and James Harrison, conditioned for the performance of the duties by H. L. Harrison, of the sheriff of Calvert county. The bond was endorsed “ securities approved, Joseph W. Reynolds, John Beckett, and recorded in the office of the clerk of the county court, on the 20th January, 1832.

On the 31st of October, 1835, the appellee filed his petition for freedom, setting forth, in general terms, his right thereto, which was denied by the plea of the appellants, and issue thereupon joined. 1st Exception. — At the trial, the petitioner proved, that some time prior to the 7th of August, 1833, Sophia Bland, one of the appellants, being the legal owner of the petitioner as her slave, who had been hired to some person in Baltimore, entered into an agreement with the…

This was an action of assumpsit, brought on the 17th of September, 1829, by appellees against- Grafton B. Duvall. Held: and all the personal estate of him, the said Lewis Duvall, which he is now in possession of. And the plaintiffs also offered proof that no payments were made by the defendant or said Richard Duvall to the plaintiffs, on account of the said notes so endorsed by them, for said Lewis Duvall.

The bill in this cause was filed on the 6th day of April, 1833, by Samuel Maynard, administrator de b. n. of Lewis Neth, alleging that on or about the 10th October, 1791, George Fitzhugh, the elder, of Baltimore county, (since déceased,) conveyed unto Walter Dulany, (since also deceased,) certain real and personal property in trust and by way of mortgage, amongst other things to secure unto one Daniel Dulany, since deceased, the payment of the sum of ¿£230, then due and…

This was an action of Replevin commenced on the 8lh day of May, 1833, brought by Thomas Hutchins against the appellant for the following negro slaves, to wit: Mary, Ann, Joshua, John. The slaves were replevied and delivered to the plaintiff as per the schedule returned with the writ in this cause.

Joseph W. Clagett, of Prince George’s county, by his last will and testament, executed on the 17th April, 1828, and admitted to probat on the 1st May, 1830, declared among other matters as follows: “ It is my will and desire, and I do hereby will and direct that the whole of my estate, both real and personal, be kept together by my executors, until all my just and lawful debts, funeral expenses and cost of administration- are fully paid and satisfied.” The testator then…

<p>A paper in the following terms was offered to the Orphans* court of OarroU county for probate.-</p> <p>“August 1836.</p> <p>“ This will certify that I do assign, and gave all my personal property unto George Wareham — that is to say-, one silver watch, one chest, one leaurough, and some carpenters’ tools, besides two notes of hand, one $200, and one of $89, and $18 boot account.</p> <p>^ Signed by me in the presence of Thomas Safer.</p> <p>HIS</p> <p>PHILIP X SELLERS.”</p> <p>MASK.</p> <p>And the subscribing witness being produced, to prove the execution of the same, and that from conversation with the deceased at the time, and from other circumstances, that the said paper was executed as the last will and testament of the party; which proof was rejected by the Orphans’court, and the paper rejected. — Held on appeal, that the testimony should have been received, and the decree was reversed, and the record remanded for that purpose.</p>

<p>A party who sells property and receives the proceeds thereof as the agent of another, who held the same in trust, is liable to said trustee, in an action for money had and received, notwithstanding the cestui que trust knew of, and consented to the sale.</p> <p>The mere circumstance of the cestui que trust knowing of and consenting to the sale, would not release the trustee from his responsibility to the cestui que trust.</p> <p>To accomplish that, it would be necessary to show, that the latter consented to look to the party who made the sale for the proceeds of the property.</p> <p>And in a suit by a trustee under such circumstances, his right to recover does not depend upon his having made advances to his cestui que trust, upon the faith of the trust fund.</p>

On the 27th April, 1835, the appellant filed his petition in Prince George's county court, suggesting that on the 17th June, 1826, Francis Belmear purchased at sheriff’s sale certain tracts of land lying in said county and called, &c. that he sued forth writs of hab.fac. to obtain possession, but their execution was rendered unnecessary by the tenants delivering possession to him and agreeing to pay said Belmear rent— that Belmear conveyed the land in -fee to the wife of…

The bill in this cause was filed by the appellees on the 12th September, 1828, and charged that, Newton Bradlee died intestate in Frederick county, without leaving any known relations or representatives, within the fifth degree of consanguinity, or affinity ; that letters of administration were granted on bis estate to the appellant; that she had assets which the appellees claimed under certain acts of assembly, as the public school of this county.

This was an action of Covenant, brought by the appellee on the 23d September, 1833, against the appellants. The declaration was for a total loss. The defendants pleaded that they had not broken their covenant, and filed the following agreement with the plaintiff. It is agreed that under the plea of non infregit conventionem, filed in this cause, the defendants may rely upon any or all of the following defences : 1. That the policy in question did not attach. 2.

AppejM. from Baltimore city court. This was a petition for freedom filed by the appellee against the appellant, and is the same case which was here on appeal at December term, 1836, vide, 8 Gill and John. 169. At the trial of the cause the appellee gave in evidence the will of Elizabeth Richmond, under which she claimed her freedom; the inventory of the goods and chattels of her estate, amounting to $4,125 52, taken the 13th June, 1832.

This was a petition for freedom, filed by Negro Peggy on the 29th day of September, 1835. The petition alleged generally that the appellant was a free woman according to the laws of the state — that she ought to be free, and was now held in service by the appellee — prayer for a judgment according to the law and evidence. The appellee denied her right to freedom, on which issue was joined. At the trial of the cause the petitioner proved by P. II.

The petitioner alleged that by the codicil to the last will and testament of Eleanor Dali, deceased, bearing' date the 19th day of October, 1829, duly proved and recorded, she devised and directed as follows: “ I hereby manumit, enfranchisé and set free my negro woman Maria, and her two children, Benjamin and Harriett, the freedom of said children to take effect when they shall have respectively attained the age of twenty-one years.” The petitioner further represented that…

This was a petition for freedom, filed by the appellant, against the appellee, on the 14th of April, 1835, claiming her right to freedom, under a deed of manumission from Anna Maria Tilghman, dated the 8th of May, 1832. After an appearance by the defendant, the case was submitted to the county court upon the following statement of facts. “ It is admitted in this case, that the petitioner was the slave for life of Anna Maria Tilghman, of Talbot county.

On the 19th November, 1831, Joseph G. Hays filed his petition in the court of Chancery, alleging that John Thomas Miles and Catharine Miles, infants, by their next friend, have filed their bill in this court against Eleanor Benson, Thomas Benson, James Bealle of James, administrator of John Benson, late of Montgomery county, deceased, and others, for the purpose of obtaining a decree for the sale of the real estate of which the said John Benson died seized, and lying in…

This was a petition for freedom filed on the 23d March, 1835, by David Cross, Airy Cross,' and their children, Charles, David, Perry, Mary, Harriet and James. The petition alleged, that the appellee, while in the possession of the petitioners and residing in Maryland, removed with the said petitioners to the state of Ohio, and became a resident, with the intention of becoming a resident and citizen thereof.

On the 28th September, 1824, Ann W. Wood filed her bill on the equity side of Charles county court,' alleging, that in the year 1818, she purchased of a certain William Strickland, a negro woman on credit, for the sum of $500, for which she executed her bill obligatory to him; that said negro belonged to a certain John Peirce, who devised her to be free at the age of twenty-one years; that said negro was upwards of twenty-one years of age when she purchased her, at, which…

Appeal, from Baltimore county court. This was an action of Replevin sued out on the 26th April, 1833, by the appellees trading under the firm of Josiah Bradiee 4r Co. for 510 barrels of flour, and 4424^ bushels of com, the property of the plaintiffs taken and detained, &e. by William Powell, Henry B. Fiddeman, John Boggs, and Alexander L. Boggs, the defendants.

On the 23d of June, 1835, William II. Fresh filed liis bill in Chancery, alleging that he, with a certain John Stocksdale, entered into a partnership, for the purpose of obtaining a contract and constructing a section of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal; that a contract was accordingly entered into between Stocksdale in his own name, and the Canal Company, for the construction of the 147th section thereof; it being agreed between the appellant and appellee that Fresh should be…

On the 15th of April, 1837, Elizabeth L. Stevenson, widow of Josias Stevenson, Jr. late of Baltimore city, deceased, filed her petition, alleging that she is a creditor of the estate of her said husband, to the amount of §9,763 04, with interest thereon from the 25th day of May, 1825, and that she became the creditor by reason of the conversion by her husband, of moneys belonging to her (in her sole and exclusive right, and under the management of trustees for her separate…

The appellant, on the 9th August, 1832, filed his bill, alleging that the appellees had obtained a judgment at law against him for $1,100, with interest from 12th December, 1818, until'paid; that the debt was contracted with Mary Knott, dum sola ; that the judgment was founded on a single bill of the appellant, given for money borrowed by him of the appellee. The bill also alleged that part of the money so borrowed, was a forged note of the Bank of the United States for $500.

This was an action of assumpsit, instituted by consent to December, 1837. -The plaintiffs counted for money had and received to their úse, and the defendant pleaded the general issue and limitations. On these pleas issues were joined.

This was a writ of error, coram nobis, to the judges of said county court, sued out on the 1st day of December, 1835, by the appellee suggesting that the said Thomas Hawkins for the use of Alexander Mundell, by the judgment of Prince George’s county court, had recovered against the said appellee, as well the sum of $213 current money, a certain debt, as the sum of $42 10, for his costs and charges by him about his suit in that behalf expended, &c.; and because, in the record…

This was an action of assumpsit, commenced on the 11th November, 1834, by the appellants against the appellees. The plaintiffs below declared for money had and received; money lent and advanced; paid, laid out, and expended; and upon an insimul computassent. The defendants pleaded non-assumpsit; non-assumpsit infra tres annos, and actio non infra, &c. On these pleas issues were joined.

This was an action of assumpsit, to recover the instalments on certain shares of stock in the company of the appellees, to which the appellant was a subscriber. The cause was before the court at June term, 1836, see 8 Gill and John. 75, and came up as before on the general issue. At the last trial, the following exceptions were taken: 1.

This was an appeal from the equity side of Baltimore county court, from an order granting an injunction, and an order continuing the same on the motion to dissolve.' On the 4th December, 1837, Albert Seekamp exhibited his bill, alleging that he was seized in fee of several 'parcels of land situate in Baltimore county, together with all and every the rights, privileges and advantages to the same belonging; that thé said parcels of land are improved with valuable grist and…

This was a petition for freedom, filed on the 12th December, 1837,- by the appellee, claiming to be born free, and alleging he was held as a slave by the appellant. The defendant below, Catón, claimed the petitioner as his apprentice, for a period not yet expired, and denied the jurisdiction of the court.

<p>The nature and circumstances of the case are fully stated by the learned judges, before whom it was tried and decided.</p>