|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
668 THE CAPE SABLE COMPANY'S CASE.
defendant, wherever it might be found, within any one of the coun-
ties of the state, liable to be taken in execution for the satisfaction of
such judgments. No execution can be issued, under these laws,
against the person of the defendant, to any county, but to that in
which he resides, as directed by the previous enactments; nor can
a plaintiff be allowed to issue writs of fieri facias directed to two
or more counties at the same time, although it may be renewed, or
continued, either on the original judgment, or on the short copy of
it sent to another county, until full satisfaction has been obtained;
in like manner as by a testatum fieri facias issuing, according to
the English law, from the Court of King's Bench to any county of
the realm, into which it may be necessary that an execution should
go, in order to extract from the property of the defendant that
satisfaction to which the plaintiff by his judgment is entitled.
And, according to the principles of law which have been applied
in all similar cases, as well here as in England, the lands and
tenements of the defendant having been thus expressly made liable,
by a regular course of proceeding, to be taken in execution, are
all, wherever they may be, within any one of the counties of the
state, bound by a lien which fastens upon them from the date of
any such judgment rendered in any county court, (j)
When these laws, enlarging the operation of judgments ren-
dered in the county courts, were passed, the General Court was in
existence, the power of which, as a court of original jurisdiction,
extended over the whole state; and from which, as setting on the
western or eastern shore, an execution might be sent, upon its
judgments, to any one of the counties of the state, against the
property of the defendant. The Court of Chancery also, being
then, as it is now, and always has been, a court having original
jurisdiction over the whole state, having been authorized to enforce
its decrees by a fieri facias, directed to any county of the state,
against the goods and chattels, lands and tenements of the defen-
dant; (k) thereby had its decrees likewise made a lien upon the de-
fendant's lands every where, to the same extent as a judgment of the
General Court. (l) And the court of Appeals having been autho-
rised to pronounce such a judgment as the inferior court of com-
law might have done, and to issue execution thereon to any
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(j) Ralston v. Bell, 2 Dall. 159; Eppes v., Randolph, 2 Call. 186; Nimmo v. The
Commonwealth, 4 Hen. & Man. 77. —(k) 1785, ch. 72, s. 25. —(I) Coombs v. Jor.
dan, ante 284.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
