|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEALE v. HAGTHROP, 581
The whole of this controversy has grown out of the deed of the
17th of August, 1797, from the late Anthony Hook to his son, the
late John Hook. This indenture, after reciting that Anthony Hook
being justly indebted to John Moale and thirteen other persons
therein named, but without specifying the amount due to all or
any of them, declares, that John Hook had agreed to pay to those
creditors of his father Anthony their several and respective debts,
in consideration of which, and also, in consideration of natural
love and affection for his son, and of the further consideration of
five shillings, Anthony Hook conveyed to John Hook his leasehold
right to two pieces of land, the one a lot of ten acres, part of the
tract called David's Fancy, and the other a lot fronting on Alice-
Anna street in the city of Baltimore, together with certain negroes
and personal property, all which are particularly described. The
indenture then concludes in these words: 'To Have and to Hold
the said ten acre lot and the other lot on Alice-Anna street for and
during all the rest, residue, and remainder of the original terms
granted for each respectively, subject to the rents and covenants
reserved and contained in the above, in part, recited lease and
assignment; and To Have and to Hold all and singular the house-
hold and kitchen furniture, plate, and negroes, unto him the said
John Hook, his executors, administrators, and assigns, forever.
Provided always, and it is the true intent and meaning of these
presents, and of the parties hereto, that if the said John Hooky his
executors, administrators, or assigns, shall absolutely omit, neglect,
and refuse to pay the said recited creditors of the said Anthony
Hook9 their several and respective just debts and demands against
the said Anthony Hooky then this indenture, and every matter,
clause, and thing, therein contained, shall cease, determine, and be
utterly null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever, any
thing herein contained to the contrary thereof in any wise notwith-
standing. '
This proviso and condition is explicit and unequivocal. The
estate conveyed to John Hook was to be null and void on his fail-
ing to pay and satisfy the enumerated creditors of Anthony Hook.
It is in fact a conveyance by Anthony Hook of certain property to
John upon condition, that he should advance a certain sum of
money for the use of Anthony Hook. This proviso, with the re-
cital, gives to the whole the shape and character of a pledge or
mortgage from Anthony to John. It was intended to indemnify
John Hook for money advanced by him to the use of his father.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
