Open main menu

Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/74

This page needs to be proofread.


68 Cass ruled and adjudged in the rygo. does not. The extinguilbment of a bool: debt, by receiving: liv`! fecurity of a higher nature, ma vary the mode of recovery, but cannot alter the right. The money due upon the bond, is iltill the money ofrtbe principal; and he has an unqueltionable right to employ the name of the obligee in an a&ion to recover it. If, indeed, in the cafe of negociable notes (which are to - · many purpofes conlidered as money) the fum due upon them, {hall {till be deemed to be the property of the principal; · there feems a ilronger reafon, that the rule (hall operate in the cafe of bonds, which, even in Penn/jlvarnh, are iultrumentsof a lefs negociable nature than notes. _ Upon the whole, we are of opinion, that the law is clearly I in favor of the plaintii£_ ‘- » Wocmnt, wrfu: Cowranrrawarre. W ` 4 2 HIS was an aétion brought againft the Sheriff of Philadel- ` Y pbia, for taking goods by virtue of a writ de rctorna ba-

4 5• rmda. The fa&s were as follow
One Clzefan, diltrained goods

LN 5 of HamiL*an, for rent, due to Samuel E n ; Hamilton, reple- . vied the goods, and gavefecurity to the Sheriff, in the ufual form; Sb *06 he afterwards moved with his goods into the houfe of the plain- tiff, who, after rent had accrued to him, diltrained the goods ; Hamilton, the next day after this dillrefs, removed the goods Q from oil: the premifes; they were followed by the Ollicer, who ' made the fecond dillrefs, and he had them appraifed in the ` houfe to which Hamilton hat; removed them ; {hortly after this appraifement, and` while the goods remained where they were appraifed, the defendant in the firfl; rcplcvin obtained judgment for his rent, and iilived a rgtarna lvabantla; by virtue of which, the ` Sheriff took the goods, and delivered them to 0%::, who fold _ _ `theru at public vendue. The queition fubmitted to the Court was, whether the goods were liable to be taken under the rzzama luzbenda, in preference .‘ of, and fo as to exclude, lVtglam’.• diilrefs ? Or whether by the _ removal of the Goods by Hamillan, the lien on the property ac-

 -— quitrti by W aglanf; diltrefs was Hot defeated as againll Em/rn ?

-` _ _ -'IYli·:__?relident after recapitulating the above fa€ts, delivered · - tl t opinion of the Court. ._ S1-111·1-tau, Prgfdwu: The firil point which atifes on the cafe, " is, whether there was any fublilling lien in favour of the iirll: dif- rainor, the goods having been replevied and fecurity given i Whatever doubt there might might have been ¢· ore, as to this qaellien, it appears to be now fertlcd by the cafe of Bwylyl wr uw