
    Peter H. Coffee, administrator, defendant in error, vs. John W. Griffin et al., defendants in error.
    When the bill alleges that the administrator of an estate is seeking to enforce a judgment against the heirs, that the administrator and securities are insolvent, that there are no debts to pay, that the administrator is himself largely indebted to the estate, that the shares of the heirs, whose land is levied on to pay the judgment, are largely in excess of the amount of the judgment, that the notes sued to judgment were for land sold at administrator’s sale and were to be accounted for in general setttlement, but not pressed to collection, that the plea of the heirs to that effect was withdrawn on the assurance that the judgment would merely stand in lieu of the notes, and that the provisions in the notes, one in writing and the other left out by mistake, would in good faith be carried out:
    
      Held, that there is equity in the bill, and though the answer denies the allegations therein, yet if there are affidavits and counter-affidavits for and against those allegations, this court will not control the discretion of the chancellor in granting an injunction until the whole case can be tried on its merits: 20 Georgia Reports, q6; 36 Ibid., 666; 40 Ibid., 243.
    
    JACKSON, Judge.
     