The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1858-06-24
WILLIAM WOODNILLE aud Others u.s. SETH READ
LEVI EASTON, HEZEkIAH EASTON, DAVID REED,
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BAL

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BAL
Il TlMORE CIrY.-May Term, lS5S.-The original Bill
in this case filed by the complanants William Wood
willie and Others creditors of Reed Easton Company,
and of czckah ason, to have sold for satisfaction of
their said debts ana claims certain real property situate
in Baltimore county, known as Lot 10 of the Baltimore
Company lands, and parts of tracts called Frederick
stadt' and Smhs Forest" 1t charges that Seth Reed
nortgaGed the sad property on May l4th 1890, TO Lew
Easton to alleged Indebtedness of $4,000, and
also to the said Levi Eason September 7th 1856 to
secure alleged Indebtedness of Sl30O0 that on Decem
Der 18TH 1886 the said Levi ESton received assign
ment Of mortgage Of S25SO17 upon the property
eNecuted IA certain Camus Ki,ller September l6n.
1886, and by him assigned to said Levi Easton that
said Levi EaStOn received the said mortgages and assign
and for part of the assets of Reed EaSton Il
and that the painants through their Equities,
out in the Bill, entitled to the benefit and advantage
thereof as creditors of said firm.
1t further charges the of the other mortgages
prior in date herein upon the said premises
or part or parts thereof the one executed by said Seth
Reed in favor of certain David Reed of Boston, Massa
chusetts, October lth lS4S, payment of a
note of Seth Reed of the amount of $l05l 76 dated April
mortgage executed by said Seth Reed June 24th 1852, to
payment of roe of S7+ Il certain Augustus NJ
Price and CamnS killer of Baltimore; but whether
either Or both of said last named mortgages is yet
due and unsatised whether the notes intended to be
secured thereby have not been paid the comanants say
they have of knowledge, though they presume
from the lapse of time that they have both been satisfied
The Bill asks that the companant he substituted to
the rights OF Levi Ea'ton under the three mortgages rst
named and that the parties the allegations of the
Bill and especially that David Reed Camilus kidder and
augustus NJ Price answer whether the mortgages stand
ing in their names aforesaid have not been duly salts
fed and paid, and what the consideration of each
thereof aud out of what transaction transactions they
arose, and that the morgaged premises be sold for the
benefit of the c0mpanant and that further relief may be
granted o them
All of the parties to the said Bill defendants having
duly appeared by solicitors and all of them eXcep
David Reed and Seth Reed, having filed their answers
respectively the compliments filed their amended Bill
the present May Torn Of the Court alleging that they had
been informed that the mortgage aOremen executed
to David Reed claimed have been transferred on or
about the 9Th of January 1852 certain John B. Toul-
min and William Henry st. John and Sophia j. St John
wife of Samuel st. John. Junior, that they claimed
interest therein and further alleging that said mort
gage has been full paid and satisfied and that inter
whatever passed said Toumin the said William
H. and Sophia St John, by said pretended assignment
and that the said parties have with said prem
Ses and that the cOmplanantS entitled to have the
sOld and to receive the proceeds thereof without
hinlrance of said TOumin and said William H. and
Sophia j. St john of them. any their partici
patton in the said proceeds and pr;yn. that parties
together with Samuel st. John, Junior, answer the
said amended and original Bills, and that the complain
ants may have the said property so and receive the
proceeds, and alleging that said defendants non
dents. and praying order of publication against them
1t hereupon, this fifth day June 1858 adjudg gcd
and ordered that the companants, by causing copy
this order he inserted in newspaper published in
the city of Baltimore, in each of four successive
weeks before the seventh day of July give notice
the said John b. Toulmin, William Henry st. John Sam
uelSt John, Junior and Sophia j. st. John. his wife
the object and substance of the said original
BIs and warn them to appear in this Court in person
by solicitor on or before the ninth day October next
the premises and show cause if any they have
why decree ought not to pass prayed
WM. GEO KREBS.
eS-laW4 True COPY Test. II II TITRNIp CI,L