WORTHINGTON v. LEE. 665

the heir a party; because, if the mortgagor should redeem, there
would be no one before the court by whom an effectual convey-
ance of the legal estate could be made, (k) According to the
course of the court, uflder a bill to foreclose, the mortgagor must,
by the decree, be allowed time to come in and redeem; and he
can only be foreclosed, or the mortgaged property ordered to be
sold, on his failing to do so, within die specified time. If he
should pay the whole mortgaged debt with interest and costs as
required, then, in all cases now, and according to the express
terms of the older decrees, he will be entitled to have the legal
estate re-conveyed to him. (I) But, in this case, those heirs of
Thomas Worthington, deceased, who hold that estate, and who
alone could make such a re-conveyance; and whose rights, in that
respect, ought to be bound by any decree which may be passed for
a sale in favour of purchasers and others, have not been made par-
ties to this suit. This case must therefore stand over, with leave
so to amend as to have them brought in as parties.

Whereupon it is Ordered, that the demurrer of the defendants
John Faner and Mary his wife, and Joshua Lee be and the same is
hereby over-ruled; and they are hereby required to make answer to
the said bill of complaint; and it is further Ordered, that the said
defendants pay to the plaintiff the sum of £5 current money and
the costs of the demurrer to be taxed by the register; and be in
contempt until the said sum of money and costs be fully dis-
charged and paid.

And it is further Ordered, that the demurrer of the defendants
Independence Houck and Matilda his wife, be, and the same is hereby
over-ruled, and they are hereby required to make answer to the
said bill of complaint; and it is further Ordered, that the said
defendants pay to the plaintiff the sum of £5 current money and
the costs of the demurrer to be taxed by the register; and be in
contempt until the said sum of money and costs be fully discharged
and paid.

And it is further Ordered, that this case stand over with leave
so to amend as to make the heirs of the mortgagee, Thomas Wor-
thington, plaintiffs or parties to this suit, (m)

(k) Powel Mortg. 970; Wood v. Williams, 4 Mad. 185; Morgan v. Davis, 2 H.
& McH. 16.—(l) Hunter v. Guant, ante 667.

(m) Since the passing of this order it has been declared, that where any convey-
ance of any freehold estate by way of mortgage to secure the payment of any debt
has been executed, and the mortgagee shall depart this life, the receipt of his execu-
87 V.2