6 RINGGOLD'S CASE.
On the 3d of November, 1824, an appeal bond, in the usual form,
was filed, executed by the defendant, Samuel Ringgold, and by
Samuel Ringgold, Junr., and Isaac Swearingen, as his sureties.
On which bond there was a certificate, signed by William Price, a
solicitor of this court, in these words: "I believe the above bond to
be good for the penalty therein mentioned, 28th October, 1824."
On the 8th of November, 1824, the plaintiffs, by their petition,
objected, that the sureties in the appeal bond were wholly insuf-
ficient; that Samuel Ringgold, Junr., had no independent means to
justify his suretiship; that Swearingen had but inconsiderable pro-
perty, if any, in comparison with the vast amount for which he was
offered as surety—his employment, for a long period, having been
only that of an overseer, or manager, of the estate of the defendant
Samuel; that the defendant Samuel had, some time before, conveyed
to those sureties all his estate for the payment of his debts then due;
and, that it was doubtful whether the property, so conveyed to
them, could be deemed liable to the debt decreed to be paid to the
plaintiffs. To this petition was annexed an affidavit of Mary Ring-
gold, one of the plaintiffs, in which she stated, that those sureties
were not sufficient; and, according to her information, they were far
from having means to meet, or support their responsibility as such
sureties. Upon which the petitioners prayed, that they might be
allowed to shew cause, and to take testimony in relation to the
sufficiency of the sureties offered.
9th November, 1824.—BLAND, Chancellor, Ordered, that the
matter of this Petition be heard during the second week of the
ensuing December term: And, that proofs be taken, as to the
sufficiency of the sureties offered, before any Justice of the Peace,
by either party, on giving reasonable notice of the time and place
of taking the same to the opposite party, or their solicitor. And
it is further Ordered, that the issuing of execution on the final
decree in this case be stayed until the hearing of the matter of this
petition or further order.
Under this order proofs were taken on the part of the defendant
Samuel Ringgold, which, together with the deed of trust from him
to Swearingen and Samuel Ringgold, Junr., and the inventory of
the property conveyed by it, were returned and filed.
30th December, 1824.— BLAND, Chancellor. The amount decreed
to be paid having given to this matter a more degree of