The Columbus weekly dispatch. (Columbus, Miss.) 1902-1905, 1904-04-14

protect the holders as against
the rights of creditors who have
no expressed. statutory or rec
ord lien These are simple or
general creditors without lien
until the fling of their bills,
which then can only operate
against the property owned by
the decedent at the time of his
death, subject to his debts? I'm
der section 1881 of our Code,
does the death of Billups confer
any additional rights on COM
plainants creditors, not enjoYed
by them in his life time? Under
that law all property not exempt
real and personal. owned by him
at the time of his death, is assets
liable to be charged and subject
ed to his creditors. But did he
own this property under the
facts in this case? And is such
property subject to a lien within
the definition of our registry
laws which make unrecorded
conveyances void as to purchas-
ers and creditors who acquire
liens without notice? Jones on
mortgages 436 and $40 says a
mortgage may be recorded after
the death of the mOrtgagor if he
has delivered it in his life time.
His creditors cannot, for that
reason, claim that the mortgage
was imperative as against them.
This is the well known legal rule
in our states. The recording of
a deed is no part Of its execution.
Neither does the lien attach to
the real estate of the debtor in
favor of his general creditors
made upon his death as against
the specific lien of the mortgage
or the title conveyed by absolute
deed, which was good againstthe
mOrtgagor or vendor, his heirs
taking the estate upon his death
subject to the encum brances and
liens Of the general creditors,
which is merely a right to have
the real estate in he hands of the
heirs applied for their benefit
upon Il deficiency of The personal
assets. This is the uniform doc
trine held by Pingrey on mort
cages, including maay decisions
from Judge Kent on down to the
present. The deed is just as
obligatory between the parties
without recording as with it.
See Jones on mortgages 4677; also
opinion of Justice Lamar in Ba-
con VS. Northwestern Mutual In
surance Co., 131, U. S. 128, which
hold that under the registry law
deeds not recorded are valid un-
less required by the law to be
recorded, and continue valid un-
til the law makes their recording
necessary. Where there is no
provision of law requiring regis
tration as an essential part of the
execution of an instrument, it is
valid and binding against the
grantor, his heirs and personal
representatives, creditors and
purchasers without notice. Un-
der these creditors bills a lien
could only be given from the
time of the filings of The bills. Is
a conveyance made fraudulent by
not being recorded prior to the
contraction of these debts on
which these bills are fled? The
case of Goodbar VS. Day, Goth
Mississippi and citation from
other authorities hold that it is
not fraud per Sc to withhold a
deed from record and that the
registry laws protect only cred
itors who have obtained liens and
that a deed may be recorded af-
ter death of the grantor as effect
ually as before, unless the deed
or mortgage be Intentionally kept
off of the record for the purpose
of giving the mortgagor or ven
dor therein a imulated, fictitious
or improper credit by holding
him out to the world as solvent
and financially worthy of credit.
This the defendant did not do,
the bank having no knowledge of
his obligations to these com plain
ant creditors. There is no proof
tending to show that there was
any actual fraud committed by
the defendant in withholding