|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RIDGELY v. IGLEHART. 543
sion. It begins and ends with possession; for it is only upon pro-
perty in the possession, and while it actually continues in the pos-
session of such a creditor, that any such lien attaches. (e) If the
possession be lost, or be suffered to remain ever so long unproduc-
tive it cannot be regained, or made beneficial by any judicial pro-
ceeding; because such a lien is only a mode of enforcing satisfac-
tion by the mere passive holding of the creditor, and thus prevent-
ing the debtor from deriving any benefit from his own until be
renders justice where it is due. It is a sort of distringas to which
certain creditors may have recourse without the previous sanction
of a court of justice. But the principles upon which this lien is
founded, can afford no illustration or support to that claimed by
this plaintiff.
The specific lien of a mortgage arises out of the express and
special nature of the contract of mortgage itself; and, owing to
its peculiar nature falls almost exclusively within the jurisdiction
of a court of equity. But the doctrines in relation to this species
of lien, it is evident, can have no bearing upon this case.
Under the civil and maritime law there are many instances of
what is called privileged creditors, whose claims are allowed to
operate as a lien upon certain property which has been erected,
saved, or benefited by their labour. By a lien of this kind, the
ship herself is bound to the material men by whom she has been
repaired, to the seamen by whom she has been navigated on the
high seas, &c. And such creditors may obtain the benefit of their
lien by proceeding against the ship alone, without naming any per-
son as defendant, or the holder. But however analogous this suit
may appear to be to a proceeding in rem in the admiralty, the prin-
ciples of the civil or maritime law, by which the lien of a privileged
creditor is governed, can have no relation to this case,
The plaintiff alleges that he has an equitable Hen upon the land
held by this defendant, and seems to rest his claim to relief mainly
upon that foundation. But an equitable lien is inseparably inci-
dent to a contract of purchase. It is a vendor's privilege and
security, founded not upon any thing expressed in the contract of
sale itself, nor on any legislative enactment or rule of the common
law; but on the principles of equity which declare it to be unjust,
that any such sale should be made absolute, in all respects, until
the whole purchase money has been paid. An equitable lien can
(e) Jacobs v. Latour, 15 Com. Law Rep. 388.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
