498 WATKINS v. DORSETT.—1 BLAND.

society and a school. It is not shewn, that this society ever ob-
tained the leave of the Legislature, in any manner whatever, to
take or hold this property. The Act of 1802. ch. Ill, authorizes
any religious society to form themselves into a body politic, and
the 8th section of that Act, and the Act of 1815, ch. 222, authorizes
such corporations to take and hold a certain amount of property.
But it has not been shewn, that the Methodist society to whom
this devise was made had formed themselves into a body politic,
and thus became qualified to hold this property by virtue of this
general leave of the Legislature, (b) Therefore I am of opinion,
that this devise must be considered as absolutely null and void by
virtue of the 34th Article of the Declaration of Rights; and upon
that ground the claim ol the society has been properly rejected.

* Whereupon it is ordered, that the foregoing statement
530 as made and reported by the auditor be and the same is
hereby ratified and confirmed: and the trustee is directed to apply
the proceeds accordingly, making payment to the said claimants or
to their respective solicitors, with a due proportion of interest that
has been or may be received, except claims Nos. 3, 17 and 28, which
are suspended until further order.

WATKINS r. DOESETT.
SUBSTITUTION.—FIERI FACIAS.

An executor or administrator who overpays takes the place of the creditor
whose debt he pays, and is entitled to the benefit of his priority, (a)

The principle of the Statute of Limitation may be applied in favor of a plain-
tiff as well as of a defendant.

The Act of Assembly which gives the process of a judicial attachment ap-
plies only to Courts of common law. (b)

Choses in action, and several other kinds of property are beyond the reach
of a, fieri facias, (c}

(b) By the Act of 1791. ch. 17, it was enacted, ''that the leave of the Leg-
islature be hereby granted to the said religious society of people called
Quakers, to enjoy forever the use of the said land in East Nottingham, and
West Nottingham: provided the Chancellor, on examination, shall find the
facts above stated to be true," &c. This appears to be the first Act of the
kind, passed in pursuance of the 34th Article of the Declaration of Rights. '

(a) See Hanson v. Worthington, 12 Md. 418; Zollickoffer v. Seth, 44 Md. 374.

(b) But see Rev. Code, Art. 67, sec. 31.

(c) Cited in Keigler v. Nicholson, 4 Md. Ch. 82, where the Chancellor said
that the rule laid down in the case in the text must he taken with some
qualification, for when the chose in action is in the hands of a third party
who is willing to abide by the order of the Court, or who admits it to belong
to the person against whom the sequestration has issued, the Court will con-
sider it liable to sequestration, and will order it to be paid into Court. As to
what may he taken under a fi. fa. see Coombs v. Jordan, 3 Bland, 284.