332 HAMMOND v. HAMMOND.—2 BLAND.

the administration of the assets of the deceased for the general,
benefit of his creditors. Ellicott v. Welch, ante, 242.

But, in so far as a mortgagee or the holder of a vendor's lien
has a claim beyond the extent of such lien, because of the defi-
ciency of the premises to pay the debt, or because of some other
claim, in addition to such debt, which there is not a sufficiency of
personal estate to satisfy, he may, in respect of such claim, sustain
a creditor's suit by thus blending two distinct causes of suit, in
only one of which the other creditors have a common interest. As
where a vendor, in addition to a balance of the purchase money,
set forth a large claim as due. to him on another account, to pay
which he alleged, that the personal estate of the deceased was in-
sufficient ; the case was treated as a creditor's suit; because, as
regarded such additional claim, the plaintiff had an interest in
common with the other creditors who he undertook to represent;
and for whose general benefit it was necessary that the Court
* should assume the administration of all the assets of the
346 deceased debtor. Bedford v. Leigh, 2 Dick. 707; Charles v.
Andrews, 9 Mod. 133; Shephard v. Lutwidge, 8 Ves. 29, note;
Jarrett v. Rider, 9th July, 1829. (t)

And there are likewise instances in which a creditor's suit may
be engrafted upon another suit; which, in its origin and object,
had no relation whatever to a case of debtor and creditor; or in
which the only object was to enforce a lien, such as a mortgage or
vendor's lieu, for the payment of a single debt. As where a mort-
gagee had filed a bill against the heirs of a mortgagor to obtain a
sale of the mortgaged realty for the payment of his debt; or where
a bill had been tiled to obtain a partition of an intestate debtor's
real estate; or where the real estate of a deceased debtor had been
or was about to be sold under the special provisions of an Act of
Assembly, 1785, ch. 72. s. 12; 1816, ch. 154; 1818, eh. 133; 1831,
ch. 311; or where in any such case a share of the proceeds of sale
was about to be awarded and paid to parties as heirs or devisees
of a deceased debtor, Lewis v. Lewis, 27th April, 1829, MS., any
creditor of the deceased may come in, by petition, for himself and
on behalf of the other creditors, without calling in his executor or
administrator as an additional party to such pending suit, and

(t) WASHINGTON COLLEGE v. GRAVES.—It was alleged, that the mortgaged
real estate was insufficient to pay the mortgage debt; and that the whole
estate, real and personal, of the deceased mortgagor, was insufficient to pay
his debts. Whereupon it was prayed, that the whole, including his unin-
cumbered real estate, might be sold to satisfy the mortgage and other credi-
tors The facts being admitted, the case was considered and treated as a
creditor's suit; and on the 26th of June, 1830, Decreed accordingly, that the
real estate in the proceedings mentioned be sold, &c.; and that notice be
given to the creditors of the deceased to file the vouchers of their claims, &c.
MS.