574 NEALE v. HAGTHROP.—3 BLAND.

Will. 455. It has been also said, and I think with justice, that
when a mortgagee, thinking himself absolutely entitled, had ex-
pended considerable sums in repairs and lasting improvements,
he should be allowed the value of them. Powel Mortg. 956, n.
In a modern case, the value of new buildings, erected by the
mortgagee, was allowed. Hardy v. Reeves, 4 Ves. 482. And a
liberal allowance for the improved value of slaves while in the
possession of the mortgagee was directed to be made. Ross v.
Norvall, 1 Wash. 14. The grounds of these decisions appear to be
that a mortgagee in possession is the legal holder of the estate;
which the mortgagor may at any time redeem; and so prevent him
from making any repairs or improvements; and if the * mort-
591 gagee has been long in possession claiming adversely, and
suffered to treat the estate as his own, and the mortgagor stands
by and permits lasting improvements to be made, he shall pay for
them. Darts v. Simpson, 5 H. & J. 147; Hepbwn v. Sewell, 5 H.
& J. 211; Howell v. Baker, 4 John. C. C. 122; Rawlings v. Stewart,
1 Bland, 22, n.; Strike's Case, 1 Bland, 57; Rawlings v. Carroll, 1
Bland, 76, n.; Swan v. Swan, 3 Exch. Rep. 443.

But the estimate of the value of such lasting improvements is to
be taken as they are at the time of accounting or passing the final
decree. For such allowances are made upon the ground, that
the improvements do, in fact, pass into the hands of the plaintiff
as a new acquisition. And they can only be a uew acquisition to
him to the extent of their value at the time he recovers or obtains
possession of them; and therefore their value at that time is to be
allowed, and nothing more. The Kierlighett, 3 Rob. Ad. Eep. 101,
It is also necessary to observe, that in charging rents and profits,
the estimate must not include any profits which arise exclusively
from such improvements; for, if they were to be embraced by the
estimate, the occupier would, in fact, be paying for the profits
of that which was his own. Therefore the estimate of rents
and profits must be made in exclusion of such as appears to have
arisen from the occupying claimant's own expenditure in improve-
ments. Moore v. Cable, 1 John. C. C. 385.

The late John Hook disposed of the lot on Alice Anna street,
and his representatives Hagthrop and wife, having disposed of the
other property in a manner in which they had no right to do, and
the bill standing unanswered and for true as to the negroes and
movable property; Hagthrop and wife must be charged with the
value of the whole of that property and interest thereon from the
date of the deed from the late Anthony Hook to the late John
Hook; and the account lor the rents and profits of the chattels
real, will commence from the same date. Hagthrop and wife
must be charged with the rents and profits of all the chattels real,
mentioned in the bill, up to the time when they, or any part of
either passed into the hands of any of the present defendants.