Montgomery County sentinel., 1875-08-20


TNElE object Of this suit is to procure n
A decree directing a deed Of trust from
William NJ. Darcy aud Anna NJ Darcy, his
wife, TO jacob Bool and llilleary l.. On'uit,
bearing date the thrticth day Of March.
eighteen hund ed and seveniy-one, to he re.
corded in pursuance of the provisions of Sec,
20, Article l6 OF the Code of Public General
Laws Of Maryland, declaring null and void
deed of trust executed by the said William
II. Darcy and Anna NJ. Darcy, his wife,
bearing date the thirtieih day of March
eighteen hundred and seventy-one, to llillcary
l.. Olfutt, or postponng the same TO the afore-
said deed Of trust to the said Bool and OiTutt,
and directing the lands and premises mem
toned in the bill TO be sold for the payment
OF the compa nants unpaid purchase money
with interest thereon aud costs of the suit
also an order granting to the complainants
the States writ of injunction restraining and
strictly prohibiting Leon W Guinard,
llillcary Il. Oflutt and James L. Barbour from
transferring, assigning or otherwise dspos-
ing the Of the six promissory notes secured
by the aforesaid deed of trust to Hillcary L,
Oi1utt and James L. Barbour, and from pro-
ceeding TO enforce the collection of said notes
or execution of said deed of trust against
said lands mentioned in the bill
The bill states that prior to the thrieth
day OF March, eighteen hundred and seventy
IN this suit, was seized in his demesne as of
fec OF q certain piece or parcel of land lying
IN Montgomery county, Maryland, containing
three quarters ofa acre, more or less, improv-
ed 10y dwelling house, store and barn; and
on the thirtieth day of March, eighteen hun
dred and seventy-one, the complainnnts
offered to sell said land to II certain William
y. Darcy, who agreed to purchase it of the
complainant for the sum of five thousand
Al q Have two Il
one thousand two years from day of sale one
thousand dollars four cars from day OF sale,
aud orc thousand dollars FIVE years from day
Of sale the deferred payment to bear Interest
from date and TO be secured by three prom
| issory notes of the said William Il Darcy.
and deed of trust on said lands payable in
the amounts and at the times aforesaid.
The bill further states that the complainant
and his wife, Sarah G. Franck. in pursuance
of said agreement did, on said thirtcth day
Of March, eighteen hundred and seventy -onc
execute deed Of conveyance 10 the said
! Darcy, and that the complainant took from
! said Darcy his three promissory notes dated
said thirtieth day Of March, eigrteeu hundred
and seyenty-one, each for the sum of one
| thousand dollars payable MS above stated, Sc
| cured by deed of trust of even date there
| with, executed by said Darcy and Anna NJ,
| his wife, to jacob Bool and liilleary H.
| Oifutt
The bill further states, that certain Leon
| w. GuinaFd, of Washington City D. G. was
| present Mt and participating in the negota-
| ton Tor SAID purchase, and also at the eXecu-
| tlOn Of said deed and deed OF trust, and was
| fully conyersant with all occurred with ref
eronce to the same aud well knew that the
| said notes and deed of trust aforesaid were
for the balance Of the unpaid purchase mon
ey of said hnd so sold as aforesaid by the
| 1am IN nd hnn 4 In
complainant expressed anxiety rs TO the
! prompt pay ment OF said notes, the said Gut
nard told him TO feel none as he, said Guinard,
| would pay said notes in case OF default being
made by said Darcey as he the suid Guinard
| was backing said Darcey; and thai the said
Guinard did pay TO the complainant the su n
of eighteen hundred dollars, part of the cash
payment for said property for the sand bar.
ccy, without which payment the complainant
would not have sold said property to said
Darcy or have accepted said notes and decd
OF trust as security for the balance OF the
purchase money.
The bill states further and charges that the
said Leon " Guinard notwithstand his said
knowledge participated aud undertaking in
the premises, contriving and intending To
cheat and circumvent the complainant and
to dcfraud him out OF the balance Of his pul-
chase money, to viii, the deferred payment
y
the knowledge OF the complainant aud by
colusiou with said Darcy obtained from the
said Darcy and wife on said thirtieth day
Of March, eighteen hundred and seventy one,
the execution Of II deed OF trust TO secure to
him, the said Guinard, tho payment Of said
sum Of eighteen hundred dollars with inter
est thereon from date, at the rate of eight
per cent. per aHuuiu, according to the tenor
his six promissory notes OF even date there
| IA q l1ll he pf
three hundred dollars, three months from
date; one for the sum Of three hundred dol
lars, six months after date; one for the sum
Of three hundred dollars, nine months from
date; one for the sum Of three hundred dol
lars, twelve months from date one for tile
Of sum three hundred dollars, fifteen months
after date; and one for the sum Of three
hundred dollars, eighteen months after date,
which said deed of trust was made to llileary
l.. Offutt and James H. Barbour to secure
the payment OF the aforesaid sum Of money
was duly recorded among the Land Records
Of said Montgomery County, on the seventh
day Of April, 1871, Mt the request Of said
Darcy.
The bill further states, that the complain
ant is credibly informed and verify believes
that the said Guinnrd has been fully paid the
said sum Of eighteen hundred dollars, so ad-
vanced by the said Guinafd 10 said Darcy,
and that the aforesaid deed Of trust, even il
not fraudulent, has been fully discharged. ?
The bill further states that The said deed OF
trust executed by the said Darcy aud vile to
the said Olutt and Bool was not recorded
within six months from the date Of its exceu-
tion, nor until the sixteenth day of May,
eighteen hundred aud seycniy-two.
The DILL further states that the said Cur
nard Notwithstanding his participation as
aforesaid and his knowledge of the complain
ants ,endor's lien for the unpaid purchase
money onsaid property is claiming priority
over the complainant and is seeking 10 en-.
force tie collection Of bis said notcs, so SC.
cured rs aforesaid by said deed Of trust tc
| bour 10 the exclusion of the mplanauts
claim TO the great wrong aud injury. And
the bin further states that the said Leon W
Gunard and James T.. Barbour are non resi-
dents Of the state or Maryland.
II 10 therefore adjudged and ordered, tha
the complainant by causing q copy Of thii
order 10 be inserted in some newspaper pub
lished at Rockville, once in each Of iou
successive weeks before the fourth day o
September, IN the year eighteen hundred ant
lBeventy y-fye, give notice to tha absent dcfen
dants Of the object and substance Of this bill
aud warn them appear in this court in per
sou or by solicitor on or before first day 0
january next, TO answer the premises AM
show cause, If any they have why deere
ought not to pass as PRAYED.
RICHARD J. BOWIE,
Chief Judge OF the Sixth Judicial Dis
trct, Md.
Trge copy-Test.
aug CT i. -. PRETTYMAN, Clk.