|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300 COOMBS v. JORDAN.
From all which these general principles seem to follow, that, at
common law, lands not being alienable by the feudatory, and
therefore not liable for the payment of his debts, it was presumed,
that |ie was trusted only upon his personal security; and the judg-
ment being in pursuance of the contract, was only to recover a
personal thing; and the execution following the judgment went
only against the goods; (m) that a statutory and judgment lien
attaches on no real estate which is not liable to be token in execu-
tion; that it in no case extends beyond the debtor's power of vo-
luntary alienation; and that it fastens upon the realty subject to all
superior rights and prior liens by which that power of alienation
is or may be limited or restrained, as by a right of dower, prior
mortgages, &c. (n)
From a very early period, it appears to have been common to
lease lands for years; but such leases were originally and most
usually granted to mere husbandmen, whose interest was esteemed
of so little consequence, that they were rather considered as the
bailiffs or servants of the lord, who were to receive and account
for the profits at a settled price, than as having any property of
their own ;and therefore, they were not allowed to have a freehold
estate; but their interest, such as it was, vested after their deaths
in their executors, who were to make up the accounts of their
testator with the lord and his creditors, and were entitled to the
stock upon the farm. Hence it grew into an established principle,
that these leases, or chattels real, as they are called, might be
taken in execution and sold like mere moveables, for the satisfac-
tion of debts, (0)
Here there is no leasehold estate in question; and therefore, in
speaking of this judgment lien, my remarks must be confined to
freehold estates upon which such a lien may attach, (p)
According to the ancient law of England, a villein being him-
self a subject of property, whatever property he himself acquired
might be taken and held by his owner as an incident, or perqui-
site of his right of property in such villein. Consequently, if an
executor had a villein for years, and the villein purchased lands in
fee, upon which the executor entered, he should have the whole
fee simple; but because ho had the villein in autre droit, that is,
as executor, it should be assets in his hands, (q) This is a sin-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(m) Gilb. Execu. 3.—(n) Bac. Abr, tit. Dower, G.- Abergaveny's case, 6 Co.
79—(o)3 Blac.Com. 141.-(p) Powel Mortg.605,609,611.-(q) Co. Litt. 117, 124,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
