The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1858-06-28

Il TIMoRE CITY.-May Term, 1S5S-The original Bill
in this case filed by the complanants, William Wood
vile and others, creditors of Reed Easton Company
and of Hezekah Eason to have sold for satisfaction of
their said debts and claims certain real property situate
in Baltimore county known Lot ITO of the Baltimore
Company lands and parts of tracts called Frederick
stadt' and Smiths Forest 1t charges that Seth Reed
mortgaged the said property May 4th, 1856 to Levi
Eason to secure an alleged Indebtedness of $4,000 and
also to the said Levi Easton September 17th 1856
secure an alleged Indebtedness of SIS OOO
Der 2s 1896 the said Levi EaSton received assign
ment of mortgage of S25S017 upon the property
executed certain Camillus Kidder September 16tn
1885, and by him assigned to said Levi Easton;
said Levi Easton received the said mortgages and assign
mens and for part of the assets of Reed Easton Co.
and that the panants through their Equities set
ont in the Bill entitled to the benefit advantage
thereof as creditors of said firm.
further charges the execution of tine other mortgages
prior in date to these herein stated the said premises
or part parts thereof the executed by said Seth
Reed in favor of a certain David Reed of Boston Massa-
chusetts, October 18th, 1S4S to payment of
note of Seth Reed of the amount of O5l76, dated April
l2th 1S4S payable three years after date and the other
mortgage executed by said Seth Reed June 24th 1852 to
secure payment of rote of S74 to certain Augustus NJ
Price and Camillus kidder of Baltimore; but whether
either or both of said last named mortgages is
due and unsatsed whether the notes intended to be
secured thereby have not been paid the cOmpanant
they have of knowledge, though they presume
from the lapse of time that they have both been satisfied
The Bill asks that the compliments be substituted to
the rights of Levi Easton under the three mortgages first
named and that the parties answer the allegations of the
Bill, and especially that David Reed Camus Kdder and
Augustus NJ. Price answer whether the mortgages
ing in their names aforesaid have been duly salts
fled and paid, and what the consideration
thereof and out of what transaction transactions they
arose, and that the morgaged premises be sold
benefit of the compliments and that further relief may
granted to them.
All of the parties to the said Bill defendants having
duly appeared by their solicitors and all them except
David Reed and Seth Reed, having filed their answers
respectively the cOmpainants filed their amended Bill
the present May Term of the Court alleging that they had
been Informed that the mortgage aforementioned
to David Reed claimed have been transferred
about the 9Th of January 1852 certain John B. Toul
min and William Henry St. John and Sophia D. ST. John
wife of Samuel St. John, Junior that they claimed
some interest therein and further alleging that said
has been fully paid and satisfied and that
est whatever passed to said TOumn the said William
H. and Sophia j. St john by said pretended assignment
and that the said parties have with said prem
ses, and that the compainants entitled to have the
same sold, and to receive the proceeds thereof without let
or hndrance of said Toulmin and said William H. and
Sophia j. St John, of Them their parci-
patton in the said proceeds and praying that said parties
said amended and original Bills, and that the complain
proceeds, and alleging that said defendants resi-
dents and praying order of publication against them
1t is thereupon this fifth day June 1883 adjudged
and ordered that the compainants by causing copy
this order to be inserted in newspaper published in
the city of Baltimore in each of four successive
weeks before the seventh day of July next give notice
the said John b. TOumin William Henry St John, Sam
ue St john Junior, and Sophia j. St john his wife, OF
the object and substance of the said original and amended
Bills and warn them to appear in this Court in person
by solicitor before the ninth day of October next to
answer the premises and show cause, if they have
why decree ought not to pass prayed.