The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-03-30

tenant in common applied to the District Court in
bankruptcy TO be discharged as bankrupt
in the bankrupt court, and there, was an
assignment and sale Of the right, title
and interest OF such bankrupt In the parti-
toned land in bankruptcy, that the purchaser
the equities established by the decree In partition
that the purchaser could not file new bill for the
partition OF the premises, but should come IN oy
petition under the decree suggesting the changes
that had occurred in the several interests held
under the decree; that the judgment creditors.
parties to the decree in partition, having also be-
come parties to the proceedings In bankruptcy,
are not entitled to demand that the claim OF the
purchaser in bankruptcy under the decree in par
tition, shall be confined 40 the mere interest OF
such tenaat in common, after the satisfaction Oh
their judgments. That the assignee 10 bankruptcy
took the rights Of the bankrupt In the same plight
and condition in which he possessed them, also
the legal liens OF the intervening Judgment credit
orS with power to enforce them, the same oelng
bound under the decree In PARTITION and that the
purchaser succeeded to no greater rights. That
proceedings to enforce the lien Oh creutor IN q
State court, pending at the commencement OF
proceedings in bankruptcy, are not anected there-
faction out Of his lien, though, as to a personal
Judgment against his debtor, he is liable to he
affected by the discharge In bankruptcy. Opin-
ions by Justice Willard.
Guignard VS.. Guiguard. Decree modified. Held,
where the answer In direct terms denies tne alle-
cations In the bill, the denial Will be taken as
proof, il only contradlcted by q single witness.
10 give tho answer such effect, the allegation 30
negatiyed must have reference to, or some con-
ncctien with, q matter material to the reliel
sought by the bill The strlnSency OF the rule al
lowing the answer to stand as proof, il contra
dictcd by only one witness, has been much relaxed,
and the tendency OF late has been TO aSslmate
the rules Of evidence II the Courts OF Equity TO
those which prevail in the Courts of Law.
Circumstances which in themselvelves may
not be in direct conflict with the de.
NAL OF the answer, but so inconsistent with 1t
as to sustain and support the cont radlctory W.T.
ness, will serve to dlSprove the answer. Where
personal property derived by a married woman
through q gift from her father Is sold. and the
proceeds OF the sale. with her assent and that OF
the husband and father are directed to be retain.
ell by the purchaser, on the same trust as altacaeu
to funds then held by him in trust she discovery
will not be allowed TO disclaim the trust anu
charge the purchaser with debt due her for
such proceeds. Unless, under extraordinary cir
cumstances, the court will not sanction the ap.
polntment or substit, tlon OF a trustee without
security. Opinion by the Chief Justice.
Mayor and wife vs.. Murdecai ct al. Decree re-
other respects confirmed. Held, where trus
stee is not limited or directed by the instrument
under which he acts, US to Investment OF the trust
fund, his discretion must be exercised with tue
on his own concerns. This, however, would NOT
sanction such investments as are never favored
or sanctioned by the court. although men OF
prudence, dealing with their own means.
might make thcin-as loans on mere personal
security-or stocks of railroad companies, or
other private corporations. The trustee Is bound
to manage the property for the benefit OF the cpStu
que trust with the care and diligence OF prudent
man. Where the trust consisted OF bonds given In
1862 secured by mortgage OF real estate, the pro-
Gee Is OF which when received the trustee on con-
sultaton with the ceStui que trust was to invest,
he was not at liberty in 1862 and 1868 to accept
Confederate treasury notes in payment,and invest
them in Confederate State bonds, knowing
that by reason Of their being domicilcd In
New York they had not the opportunity OF con-
sultaton as 10 the investment they might
prefer Much less was he justified In call
ing in the bonds. and accepting such cur.
rency In payment and making the like invest
ment OF the proceeds. Atrustec responsible under
the circumstances for accepting Confederate
money in satisfaction OF hond and mortgage:
the obliger SO paying to the trustee Is not bound
TO look to the application Of the money. If, how.
ever. such payment was the result of fraudulent
or wiliul combination, to the prejudice OF cestut
Qui trust, or IrEnowing OF the intended misap-
APPLICATION OF the proceeds by the trustee ne ID
any wrongful way conduces to the accomplish.
ment OF that design, the mortgage Will be set
up against him. Opinion by the Chief Justice