MATTHEW8 V. WARNER. 461 �for doubt that the complainant bas forgotien the real facts of the transaction. �The plea and the answer are a bar to the suit in law and in fact, and the complainant's bill must be dismissed, mth �costs. ���Matthews V. Warner and others. (Gircuit Cov/rt, D. Matsachusetts. March 1, 1881.) �1. Moktagok — Separation of Notes fhom Moktgagb — EquiTABiiB �Relief. �A mortgagor is net entitled to relief in equity upon, the ground that the mortgage has been separated from the outstandln^ aad unpaid notes which it was given to^sectire. �2. TJSURT— EQtriTABLE RsiilEi. �One mho seeks relief in eqnity upon the ground of i^suiy i^ust flrst ofEer to.repay the money actiial^ lent. �3. SaMB^SAME— FOREIGN 8TAT0TE. �Astatuteof New York, which autliorizea a borrower to obtain a cancellation of securities withotit payriie&it, upon the ground of usuty, • dannot bind a cou^t of equity, out of the state,^ in dealirig with a' bond^ and mortgag* made and delivered wtjiin the state. . �4. HuSBAHP AND WlFE^lio^DS IN NAMB OF WlFB -ti XNTERES^ OF �QUBBAND. �5. FlUDD — MOBTGAGE— ABSIGNEB WiTHODT NoMOE.— [Ed. �In Equity. - �W. A: Abbott and J". S. Abbott, for eomplainanii �E. R. Hoar and J. B. Warner, for defendants'. �LowBLL, 0. J. This bill, filed in Deoember, 1877, alleges -that the plaintiff, Virginia B; Matthews, of New York, was, on the first of January, 1877, and for a long time before and after, the owner of 150 bonds of the Memphis & Little.Eook Railroad, and of 50 bonds of the Carolina Central Railroad, of $1,000 each, giving the numbers; that they were her sep- arate property ; that some person to her unknown, and with- out her consent, authority, or knowledge, placed these bonds in the hands of Warner & Smith, of Boston, the defendants ; that Warner & Smith, as the plaintiff is informed and be- ��� �
