|
|
|
|
|
|
|
172 SALMON v. CLAGETT.
will of the contracting parties; and it is admitted, that
mortgage bat all the common law requisites of a binding deed.
But the legislative enactments here, which require deeds to be re-
corded, like those of England requiring enrollment, are universally
admitted to have been intended to preserve the evidence of the con-
tract; and to prevent the practice of fraud upon creditors and pur-
chasers. The abject was to furnish the means of notice and a
protection to innocent third persons, not parties to tie contract,
It never has been held, that those laws altered any principle of
the common law, or required any thing, in addition to the common
law solemnities as a necessary constituent of a deed to secure the
payment of money, as between the parties to it. Hence, a deed of
this kind, as between the parties themselves, has always been
deemed as valid and effectual without recording as with it. And
as to creditors and purchasers, if they have, by any other means,
obtained that notice, which it was the design of recording to give,
even they are not allowed to object to the validity and operation
of the deed on that account. But, in no instance, has any of the
immediate parties to such a deed ever been suffered to object, that
it should not be enforced; because it had not been recorded in time;
such an objection can only come from a creditor, a purchaser, or
some innocent third person whose interests are affected by the deed.
Here there is no such third person before the court; the objection
is made by some of the parties to the mortgage itself; which can-
not be permitted; since as to them the deed is valid by the common
law; and in no way affected, as a security for money, by the acts
of Assembly requiring such instruments to be recorded. There is
then, nothing in this position taken against the validity of the mort-
gage. (o)
It appears that Charles Salmon had agreed to lend his credit to
Thomas Claggett, by selling him goods to be paid for at some future
day | by lending him money; and by becoming his surety, in the
way of lending or endorsing notes. Hence, in respect to that
agreement, they stand towards each other simply as creditor and
debtor. But, for the purpose of securing Salmon against any loss
be might sustain by the credit so given; Thomas Clagett with
Elizabeth Clagett and others mortgaged their property to Salmon;
(o) S Inst. 674; Northcott v. Underhill, 1 Ld. Raym. 388; S. C. 1 Salk. 199;
Bac. Abr. tit Bargain and Sale, E. 1; Bushell v. Bushell, 1 Scho, k Lef. 98;
Wood v. Owings, 1 Cran. 240; Hamilton v. Russell, I Cran, 315; Dorsey v, Smith-
son, til. & J. 61; Hudson v. Warner, t H. & G, 415.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
