9. That in said proceedings, said Saul H. Meister, appeared in person and with his attorney, one Simeon Cugell. That said Cugell in behalf of said Meister prevailed upon the attorney for this plaintiff, Daniel R. Foley, to withhold the issuance of said Writs of Restitution for the period of ten days beyond the thirty days allowed by law for such payment after judgment had been entered as above set forth and promised to pay the amount due with costs. That said Daniel R. Foley held open said matter not only for the said extra ten days above referred to but a further period of four days before having said Writs of Restitution issued and served.

10. That subsequent thereto in September and October, 1918, said Saul H. Meister by himself in person and said Simeon Cugell besought Daniel R. Foley to intercede in behalf of said Saul H. Meister with this plaintiff to the end that he might be reinstated in regard to said land contracts and agreed and promised that if this plaintiff would so do he would pay all the arrears in said contract, the village and state taxes which had been paid by said plaintiff, the mortgage tax which said plaintiff had also paid, the cost of said suit and the attorney fee incident thereto. That the plaintiff was at the time willing to enter into negotiations to that end and so instructed said Daniel R. Foley, who in turn communicated the same to said Meister. That said Meister along about November 2nd, 1918, suddenly brought such negotiations to an end by coming to the office of the said Daniel R. Foley and attempting to make a tender of the amount which would then have been due had said contract been in full force and effect at the time. That said Foley had at the time no authority to accept such tender, being only authorized to accept a settlement upon the terms which said Meister had laid down as aforesaid when he asked said Foley to intercede in his behalf. That nothing more was done or said with relation to said contracts either by said Meister or this plaintiff at said time.

11. That said Saul H. Meister along the middle part of July, 1919, procured another attorney, one Thomas Thompson, to approach the said Daniel R. Foley with reference to said lots. Said Thompson who claimed now that he had an interest in said lots by virtue of some arrangement with one Julius Lefton. And that he wished said lots to be granted to him and said old contracts reinstated on payment of the amount at that time due thereon. Said Thompson exhibiting to said Foley a certain quit-claim deed as the basis of said Meister's claim at the time.

12. That said Foley at once informed his former clients of the affair and began an investigation and from said investigation of the record of Register of Deeds of the County of Wayne found out the following facts:

(a) That on the fourteenth day of June, 1918, there was recorded in said Register's Office a certain quit-claim deed purporting to have been made by said Saul H. Meister as vendor and Julius Lefton as vendee on August 13th, 1917, which embraced all of said lots first above mentioned, said deed being recorded in Liber 1252 deeds, page 494, Wayne County Records, a copy of which is also hereto appended marked Exhibit "G," and made a part of this bill of complaint, reference to which records and exhibits is hereby prayed.

(b) That on the fifteenth day of October, 1918, another quit-claim deed was recorded in said register's office dated October 14th, 1918, which said deed purported to be a subsequent quit claim of said lots by said Meister to said Lefton for the purpose of correcting an error in the first deed above mentioned. Which said deed was recorded in Liber 1308, page 19 of said records, a copy of which is also hereto appended and made a part of this bill, marked Exhibit "H," reference to which is hereby prayed.

13. That said deeds were fraudulent, as the plaintiff believes, and made for the purpose of defrauding and vexing this plaintiff and were wholly without consideration and are and should be declared null and void and of no effect whatever as against any right, title or interest which this plaintiff has in or to said lots. That said Julius Lefton, as this plaintiff is informed and believes, was subject to the draft in the late world war, and was inducted into service some time during 1917 or 1918. That no mention of said quit-claim deed of August 13th, 1917, was ever made to this paintiff, nor was it in any way aware of its existence until said middle of July, 1919. That this plaintiff never consented either to the transfer of said contracts nor of said Meister's interest in said land, nor was it asked to so consent, although by the expressed terms of said contracts, such consent was required before such transfer could be made. That during the fall of 1917, after said deed was made, said Meister held himself out as a vendee under said contracts and made payments thereon up to December of said year. That he held himself out and acted as the only interested party during all the said Circuit Court Commissioner proceedings, and also throughout all the negotiations subsequent thereto as above stated, and never during all this said period mentioned either to this plaintiff or any one acting in its behalf, that anyone else was in any way interested or had or claimed any right, title or interest in or to said lots. That by various conversations, postals, letters and in every other manner said Meister declared himself to be the owner of the title of said lots as given by virtue of said contracts after said deeds were made, and even in July, 1919, by his attorney, said Thompson, claimed to be the real party in interest, and offered to remove the cloud on the title thereto caused by said quit-claim deeds provided he were reinstated and recognized as the true and valid and subsisting vendee therein. That no stamps were affixed to either of said deeds as would have been required had they been given for a valuable consideration.