IGLEHART v. ARMIGER. 519

IGLEHART v. ARMIGER.

The vendor's equitable lien an incident to a contract of purchase: its peculiar nature
and character: two equitable liens upon the same estate may well exist together.

An equitable lien, not being assignable in its nature, is extinguished by the assign-
ment of the bond or note given for the payment of the purchase money.

An assignment or bequest of debt carries with it all the securities.

The assent of parties cannot authorize the passing of a decree for which the case
set forth in the bill affords no sufficient foundation.

This bill was filed on the 30th of September 1828, by James
Iglehart, Robert S. Bryan, and William Me Parian, against Ben/a-
min Armiger, Richard G. Hutton, Richard D. Hill, Rezin Estep,
John S. Selby, and Nicholas I. Watkins. The object of the bill
was to have a tract of land which had been sold by the plaintiff
Iglehart, as trustee under a decree of this court, and purchased by '
the defendant Armiger, resold for the payment of the balance of
the purchase money; on the ground, that the equitable lien of the
vendor still subsisted in full force and unimpaired. The bill
stated, that the bonds, taken by the trustee Iglehart to secure the
payment of the purchase money, had been assigned, and were
then held by the plaintiff McParlan, as the assignee thereof; and,
that the defendants Selby and Watkins had agreed to guaranty their
payment. Whereupon the plaintiffs prayed, that the land might
be sold for the payment of the balance of the purchase money which
had been secured by those bonds, and for general relief.

The defendants, Selby and Watkins, by their answer, admitted
the facts as stated in the bill; but insisted, that a decree should
pass, in the first instance, for the sale of the land; because they
were, by their guaranty, only responsible upon an eventual defici-
ency of the land and the persons bound before them.

None of the other defendants having appeared, as required by
the subpoena which had been served on them, an interlocutory
decree was, on the 11th of December 1828, passed against them,
and a commission issued, under which testimony was taken and
returned. Upon which the case was submitted.

10th January, 1829.—BLAND, Chancellor —This case standing
ready for hearing, and having been submitted on the notes of the
plaintiffs' solicitor, the proceedings were read and considered*

The circumstances and facts are these. Joseph Selby died intes-
tate, seized of a certain tract of land which descended to his