Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 2.djvu/285

 278 FEDERAL REPORTBB. �Chapin to secure the payment of his note for $1,600, ail which was unknown to complainant, and that there were alao other encumbrances of the premises to the amount of $30,- 000; that February 24, 1876, the savinga bank took steps to foreclose its mortgage, ■which were afterwards abandoned, the said mortgage having been paid, and on March 13, 1879, the bank released the 10 acres to D. E. Straw for $2,000, and on the same day deeded to Straw the residue of the premises conveyed to it in mortgage, and that this was done to defraud Chapin's creditors; that on the eleventh of April, 1877, the complainant, believing Straw's title to be valid, purehased of Straw the 10 acres, relying on the false representations of the respondenta that the title of Straw, under the foreclosure by the Bavings bank, was valid, and that his mortgage of $15,000 was invalid; that the consideration for the purchase by complainant of the 10 acres from Straw was $15,000, of which $7,000 was paid by a mortgage of the premises to Becure three notes of complainant ; that Straw agreed to give a warranty deed of the premises, but by reason of certain clauses in the deed it was simply a release and quitclaim of Straw's interest, and the complainant was deceived, and in- duced to aceept said deed as a deed of warranty, it being drawn on a blank of that description, and changed by the addition of these words and clauses; that complainant bas paid the $7,000, and that the savings bank never acquired any title to the premises under their mortgage and pretended foreclosure. �ît is also chargea in the bill that subsequent to April 11, 1877, Straw pretended to convey to complainant, by deed of warranty, 85 acres of other lands, and that he paid about $15,000 as a consideration therefor, but said deed was fraud- ulently drawn on a warranty blank, and altered so as to be in effect a release. The prayer of the bill is that the respond- ents may be decreed to pay back ail sums they have thus fraudulently obtained from the complainant. Before any answer was filed the parties to this suit arranged terms of settlement of this and other controversies, some of which were in litigation before the circuit court of Massachusetts, ����