Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-10-04
DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT.
Opinions OF the Supreme Court % the
State OF Tenncssee, az jackson. April
Term, 1850.

Term, 1880
! Henry & Rurton g. Drake & Compton
This case comes up by an appeal from a decree Of
the ehaucsOr, sustaining demurrer % The bill.
TIE object Of the bill 10 protect slave, for the
price OF which the cSmplanants are sureties, from
execution creditors Of the purchaser, upon tae
! ground that, by the decree Of the Court under
which be was sold, lien was reserved and the
purchaser has become insolvent without disohargng
the note for the consideration
The facts, slated in the bill, are: thai ct the
March Term, 1866, Of the Chaneery Court for Mad
ison county. decree made upoa the pet tien Of
THOMAS MORAN, Administer Of JOHS lEGRAz.
decd against the Distributes to SELL among other
property. negro woman, named SusAH, who Wa5
struck off to defendant DRAKx, at S5Ol, for which
he executed his note at twelve montas credit, with
the compIanants as his sureties, that lien re-
tanned by the decree, upon the slave, for the pay
msnt &c the paFchase money. That the note has
MT been paid. aud that although the sale was Con-
frtned February Term. 1857, yet title has yet
been vested By decree, in the purchaser, Drake
That DRAKE is utterly iasOlvent, and they WI have
the m1Eey 70 pay, uaess the slave is hsd liable un-
der the hen reserved
Isis fustser stated that defendant, COMPTON,, who
Is constable Of Madison county, has levied sundry
executions, in his hsnds. against DRAEE. upon the
slave SUsAs, and mas taken possession Of her, and
appointed day for her sale. by peblie advertise
meat The prayer is for the sale Of the slave, for
the payment OF The BOte in which they are bound
as sureiies, aud for Injunction, and attachment.
There would be no doubt, but that this ball would
be entertained If the cnmpainants bad paid up the
purchase money, and thereby, raised 40 equity to
be substituted to the rgh,s Of she creditor. MeNsi
-, VS. Eastlard, 10 Yerg., $40. Meigs l72. StOr.
Eq., COZ and jIst htls thai no such ight would
exist. even if Inc money had been pasd ~ them
but for the lea retained in the decree. Bat the
question here, is whether when the money has roe
betn paid By the surssies, they can claim the 6sne-
ft of tue lien reserved- We have no decision upon
this precise point, and can only be gded BY prin-
eiple.
The vendor has no lien upon slaves or other pro-
psrty as upSa land, for the security Of the PSF
chase N lney When the sale is made, either by the
owner himself or By Court, the right TO the pro-
pIty passes uqineumbersd TO toe purchaser. II
can only be held liable for the consideration. By ex-
press contract IN the former case, by mortgage or
reservation of the title, in the latter By ProEis-
ion in the decree.
This last made, is in the nature Of and equivalent
to the former. 1t binds the properly. aad ltnits
the nights and power Of the vendee over it. until the
pneeis pa5 FOR the benefit AID security Of the vendor
But the question here is have the sueeties Of The
vendee right to enforce OF compel en- observance
Of that lien for their benefit; 10 other words, TO be
substituted the rights Of the creditor, IN regard 70
the property, before they have discharged the debt
The case Of Green Crockett. z Dew. and Bat
800, is upon this doctrine. and cOmmends itself 10
an approval by its reas0a aud justice. The rulsin
equity. which has ripened into maxim, that sure
ties are entitled 10 the benefit Of ell securities which
tue creditor obtains against The principal debtor IS
/ ia that, then extended to . case where The debt
has been not paid, but the principal has become
| ins0lVeni. That was 8 case Of land sold under 3
decree Of Court when the title retained. until
the purchase money should be paid Il is Ihsrs
| held, that the principal debtor he'd become an
solvent, the sureies, by virtue Of thsir LIABILITY to
suffer- nad - right before Psying the debt, to Ute
their bill 10 the conVeyanee OF the land,
| and have il applied to their relief" Bunting Vs.
Racks, in the same volume, page $780, AMI Williams
rs. Helen, ! Dew. EI, ISL, are ciled As Ascendant
/ decisions.
Nnbodl looking further we approve the principle
] of their cases, and adopt il There can difference
| in the equity Of the surefies between case Of
real es,at. and that Of slaves, With lien, or the
tbe titls expressly reserved BY the decree for the
| sale.
The property is bound for the debt to the eredi-
tor and Wneu the principal debtor. or purchaser,
becomes nsoveht, his s1reties have interest in
it. 50 far t. be authorized 10 compel It's application
TO their discharge aud exonsrstion in preference to
tine general creditors Of their principal or Purchas-
from him.
! We ihink, then, upon these principles, that the
| bill should have been entertained, and the prsyeF
granted. The decree sustaining the demurrer viii
/ be reversed aud the oased remsnded for answer.
CARgFHERs.
Test: NJ. D. WRLcH. Clerk AID Master