clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search		 search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 367   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

MATTHEWS VS. MERRICK. 3fi7
this ? They do not in the letter referred to make the immediate
payment of the residue of the claim a condition precedent upon
which the credit was to be given, and their neglect or forbear-
ance from that time until 1847, nearly three years, to take
measures to coerce payment of the decree is strong to show
that no such implied condition was intended. If the complain-
ants had designed to affix a condition to their proposition to
allow this credit, they should have said so, and then the other
side would have known precisely the ground upon which they
stood. But this was not done, and he rested and reasonably
rested upon the well grounded confidence that the credit would
be allowed him, and the forbearance of the complainants to
press the payment of the residue of the claim was well calculated
to assure him that his understanding in regard to the proposition
was their's likewise. The letter in question refers to the former
proposition of the plaintiffs to allow this credit, and insists upon
this proposition, rejecting at the same time the defendant's pre-
tension to be allowed interest upon the credit. This, then, in
the discussions between these parties was plainly the complain-
ants' view of the merits of the question, whilst the defendant
was contending for a larger credit, and contending too, as it
would seem from the letter, with good prospects of success, for
the writer admits that at one time he was impressed with the
justice of the defendant's view of the subject. The letter is,
in my opinion, an unqualified offer to allow the credit in ques-
tion, and I strongly incline to think is not merely gratuitous, but
founded upon a consideration which entitles it to the favorable
consideration of the court.
THOS. S. ALEXANDER, for Complainants.
A. RANDALL, for Defendant.

  		clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 367   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  Cannot perform flastmod(): Win32 Error Code = 2

Maryland State Archives