Priority over execution by subjects. S. 75. judgment and execution (g), executed by elegit before any suit commenced by the Crown, is preferred to the extent of the Crown issuing on a bond debt, bearing date before the subject's judgment, and assigned to the Crown before the subject's execution. But where the defendant's goods have been seized in execution on a judgment at the suit of a subject, an extent of the Crown, whether in chief or in aid, has preference over the prior fi. fa. of the subject, unless the goods have been actually sold (h). (3.) Simple contracts of Crown debtors. Simple contract debts due to the Crown (except the arrears of accountants, in respect of any office which they may hold as accountants to the Crown within 13 Eliz. c. 4, hereafter mentioned) constitute no lien upon the lands of the Crown debtor, until they have respectively become debts upon record, either upon being found by inquisition (the result of which becomes a record of the Court on being returned and filed), or by a judgment of a Court (i). An obligor of a bond to the Crown is not liable as a debtor to the Crown on the bond, until breach of the condition (k). (4.) Lands of Crown debtors charged. S. 75 of the said statute (1) enacted, that all manors, &c., which should come to, or be in, the hands, possession, occupation, or seisin, of any person to whom the same manors, &c. should descend, revert, or remain in fee simple or in fee tail, general or special, by, from, or after, the death of any of his ancestors as heir, or by gift of his ancestor whose heir he might be, which said ancestors should be indebted to the king, or to any other person to his use, by judgment, recognizance, obligation, or other specialty, the debt whereof should not be paid, should be, and stand charged to, the payment of the same debt, and of every part thereof. (g) Att. Gen. v. Andrew, Hard. 23. Malins; Rorke v. Dayrell, 4 T. R. 402. (i) Man. Ex. 1. (k) King v. Tarleton, 9 Pri. 656; Rex v. Marsh, McCl. 688. (1) 33 Hen. VIII. c. 39. of other And s. 80 thereof enacted, that if any manors, &c., should be In the hands charged with the debt of the king, and should be, at any time, persons, in the seisin, or possession, of persons other than the obligor, that then all the said manors, &c., should be chargeable with the said debt. (5.) Statutes staple. Statutes staple are, at the present day, disused; but, since the above Act places all obligations and specialties made to the Crown on the footing of statutes of the staple, it will be necessary to consider briefly the nature and effect of these latter securities. The statute staple, then, is a bond of record, acknowledged before the mayor of the staple in the presence of the constables of the staple, or one of them, pursuant to 27 Edw. III. c. 29. And to this end the statute required, that there should be a seal ordained, which should be affixed to all obligations made on such recognizances acknowledged in the staple (m). By 23 Hen. VIII. c. 6, s. 11, a recognizance in the nature of a statute staple was framed with the same process as the statute staple (m). Under a statute staple, or recognizance in the nature of a statute Process. staple, if the conusor cannot be found within the staple, nor his goods to the value of the debt, the mayor sends the recognizance, under the king's seal, into Chancery; after which the first process is to take the body lands and goods of the conusor all in one writ, which is returnable into Chancery, and under which similar proceedings are had for extending the lands, &c., as upon an elegit. But the sheriff, after the extent, cannot deliver the lands, &c., to the conusee, but must seize them into the king's hands; and in order to obtain possession of them, the conusee must sue out a liberate, which is a writ issuing out of Chancery, commanding the sheriff to deliver to the conusee all the lands, tenements, and chattels, by him taken into the king's hands by the extents and appraisement made thereof, until he shall be satisfied. Upon this writ the sheriff only delivers the legal possession, as upon an elegit; and this delivery on the part of the sheriff completes the execution (n). (m) Bac. Abr. Execution, B. 2. (n) 1 Vent. 41, 42; 2 Saund. 70 b n. 13 Eliz. c. 4. Infant. Banker of accountant. (6.) Lands of accountants to Crown when bound. By 13 Eliz. c. 4, it is enacted, that all the lands, which any accountant to the Crown shall have within the time whilst he shall remain accountable, shall, for the satisfaction unto the queen's majesty, her heirs and successors, of his arrears, be liable to the payment thereof, and be had in execution for such arrears, in like manner, as if he had the day he first became accountant, stood bound by writing obligatory, having the effect of a statute staple, to her majesty, her heirs or successors, for the true payment of the same arrears. Consequently, the lands of an accountant to the Crown are bound from the time the party enters into office (o); but the Act does not extend to accountants whose receipt does not exceed 3007. Upon an extent in chief against the Crown's debtor, if he be an accountant within 13 Eliz. c. 4, the writ directs an inquiry to be made with reference to the period at which the lien attached, and at any time since. And the like, if a debt arise upon a bond put on the footing of a statute staple, within the 33 Hen. VIII. c. 39 (p). A recognisance entered into by a guardian in the matter of an infant is not a debt due to the Crown, at least not of such a public nature as to authorize the issuing of the Crown process (2). An extent in chief may issue against a banker for all sums which he receives, knowing them to be the money of the Crown; and if mixed up with the moneys of the party paying in the Crown moneys, the amount would be a question for a jury (r). So an extent in chief may issue against a banker for the recovery of interest allowed by him on the half-yearly balance of a tax collector's account, in which his own and the Crown moneys are blended, and also to recover the amount of a promissory note issued by the bank, payable to bearer, and received by the tax collector from a tax payer (s). (7.) Chattels bound from teste. As the Crown is not bound by the Statute of Frauds, which directs that chattels shall only be bound from the delivery of the (0) The case of the Chancellor, &c. of Oxford, 10 Rep. 55, 6; The Bishop of Bristow v. Coxhead, Mo. 257; Nicholls v. How, 2 Vern. 389; Co. Litt. 209 a, note. (P) Manning's Ex. 36, 37. (a) Exp. Usher, 1 Ba. & B. 199. See Reg. v. Bayley, 1 Dr. & W. 224. (r) Rex v. Ward, 2 Exc. 301, note. (s) Regina v. Adams, ib. 299. writ of execution into the hands of the sheriff, the property of the king's debtor is bound from the day of the teste, although the writ were not delivered to the sheriff, or even sued out, till long afterwards (t). Nor would there be any relation in bankruptcy, as against the Bankruptcy. Crown, to the time of the bankruptcy, as there would between subject and subject (u); but if the extent was tested on a day subsequent to the bankruptcy, it would come too late (x). And where an extent was set aside for irregularity, and a second extent issued, tested the day on which the first issued, it was set aside as void as against an intermediate vesting in the assignees (y). The Crown process will be preferred, where the extent is tested on the same day as the appointment of trustees in bankruptcy (z). But if the appointment be prior to the teste of the extent, or date of the fiat for it, then the trustees will be entitled to the personal property of the bankrupt, notwithstanding the debt is due to the Crown (a). (8.) Crown subject to prior equities. The Crown, claiming under an extent, is, like other judgment creditors, subject to prior equities, and to such incumbrances as the debtor has lawfully created (b). An equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds, made before the lien of the Crown has attached, is binding upon the Crown (c); and the better opinion seems to be, that the circumstance of the Crown obtaining possession of the legal estate under an extent, could not affect any equitable charge which is created by the debtor before the lien of the Crown has attached (d). So also, an equitable mortgage of renewable leaseholds by deposit of title deeds is entitled to preference over a subsequent lien of the Crown, in respect of the renewed, as well as of the original, lease, although the Crown debt may have accrued before the date of the (t) Man. Ex. 49. (u) Regina v. Arnold, 7 Vin. Ab. 104; Att. Gen. v. Hanbury, in Scacc. 2 Show. 481; Att. Gen. v. Capel, 2 Show. 480; Brassey v. Dawson, 2 Stra. 978; Man. Ex. 49; and see 2 Exc. 299; Exp. Smith, 5 Ves. 207. (x) Drury v. Man, 1 Atk. 95; and see 14 Ves. 87; Man. Ex. 48. (y) West on Extents, 113. (z) Parker Rep. 126; Rogers v. Mac kenzie, 4 Ves. 752. (a) Rex v. Man, 2 Str. 749. (b) Casberd v. Ward, Dan. 238; 6 Pri. 411; The King v. Humphery, McCl. & Y. 173; The King v. Lee, 6 Pri. 369; Giles v. Grover, 6 Bli. N. S. 292; 1 Cl. & F. 72. (c) Casberd v. Ward, sup. (d) Burgess v. Wheate, 1 Ed. 255; Hodge v. Att. Gen. 3 Y. & C. 342; 5 Jarm. Conv. by Sweet, 73. Prior assignees, &c. Partner. Landlord. Interpleader. Excise duties. renewal (e). Not only all interests actually created by the debtor before the lien of the Crown has attached, but also the conditions, to which the lands have been subjected prior to the date of such lien, are binding upon the Crown (ƒ). So the extent of the Crown of later date is postponed to a bonâ fide assignment in trust for creditors, though it be an act of bankruptcy (g), and to an assignment of a fund, though not completed by notice to the trustees of the fund (h). So goods pawned before the teste of the writ, cannot be taken without first satisfying the pawnee, or being subject thereto (i). So under an extent against a partner, the Crown can only sell the share of the partner after payment of the copartnership debts (); and where one partner assigned his share to the others in trust, to indemnify them against a joint and several bond, the assignment was held to have priority to the extent (7). So the extent of the Crown is in general subject to the general lien of a factor (m), and of wharfingers, for their general balance due before the teste of the extent of the Crown (n). The landlord is not entitled, as against an extent, to his year's rent under 8 Anne, c. 14, s. 1, in respect of goods distrained for rent and not sold (0). Nor can a debtor of the Crown debtor avail himself of the Interpleader Act (p). The lien of the factor or agent is postponed to the extent of the Crown for excise duties by 4 & 5 Vict. c. 20, which enacts, that all excisable goods, and the materials, implements, and machinery, used in preparing and manufacturing the same, "in the custody or possession of the manufacturer, or of any factor, agent, or other person in trust for him," shall be liable to all the excise duties, penalties, and forfeitures, which, during the time of such custody or possession, shall become owing and be incurred by the manufacturer, and shall remain so liable, and be liable, to seizure under an extent, into whosesoever hands they may come; except that where, after |