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 370   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

370 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
and agreed upon by the parties. And although the credit is
entered on the 12th of November, 1842, prior to the allowance
of commissions by the Orphans Court, the single bill of Stewart
appended to the settlement, and given for the balance ascer-
tained by it to be due, bears date on the 21st of December,
1843, upwards of eleven months after the allowance. In addi-
tion to this, it appears by a paper proved to be in the hand
writing of Stewart, and dated on the 23d of the same month
and year, that to secure the payment of the same precise sum
he conveyed to Brown, by a bill of sale, certain articles of agri-
cultural produce, which, notwithstanding he, Stewart, after-
wards sold.
Now it is said, that though Stewart, in this solemn and au-
thoritative manner recognized his indebtedness to Brown in the
sum fixed by the settlement, and that although he did this after
he knew or certainly had the means of knowing the amount of
commissions allowed by the court, that still he is not to be con-
cluded, but may now open that settlement, and show it to be
erroneous with respect to transactions and proceedings which
had occurred before he signed and sealed instruments acknow-
ledging his indebtedness, in the sum in question, in the most
obligatory form known to the law.
No attempt has been made to impeach the settlement on the
ground of fraud, and I can see nothing in the evidence to show
that these instruments were executed under the influence of
mistake. The only witness who speaks upon the subject of
commissions is Mr. Camden, and if he is to be credited, and
there is nothing in the cause upon which a suspicion of his ve-
racity can be founded, the amount of compensation to be paid
by Brown to Stewart for such services as he might render as
one of the administrators, was referred exclusively to the dis-
cretion of the former.
Conceding the agreement between these parties to be proved,
it is supposed it is obnoxious to the remarks of the Court of
Appeals, in the case of Owings vs. Owings, 1 Har. & Gill, 484,
in which agreements transferring the right to administer upon
an estate to a third party, in consideration of receiving from

  		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 370   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