ments, and hereditaments, bona fide aliened, before the action brought, shall not be liable to such execution." 59. Estates in fee simple are not in general liable to the payment of simple contract debts-a doctrine not very consonant to natural justice. But by the statute 13 Eliz. c. 7., when a man is declared a bankrupt, the commissioners have a full power to dispose of all his lands and tenements for payment of all his debts. 60. Where a trader died before he was declared a bankrupt, his real estate was not liable to his simple contract debts. But now, by the statute 47 Geo. III. sess. 2. c. 74., it is enacted, "that when any person, being at the time of his death a trader within the bankrupt laws, shall die seised of, or entitled to, any real estate, which he shall not by his last will have charged with the payment of his debts; and which would have been assets for the payment of his debts due on any specialty, in which the heirs were bound; the same shall be assets, to be administered in courts of equity for the payment of all the just debts of such person, as well debts due on simple contract as on specialty: provided that all creditors by specialty shall be paid the full amount of their debts before any creditors by simple contract, or by specialty, in which the heirs are not bound, shall be paid any part of their demands.” Ancaster. v. Mayer, 61. The personal estate is however the first and 1 Bro.R.454. immediate fund for the payment of debts. And Burton v. though a person charge his real estate, by his will, Knowlton, 3 Ves. 107. Brummell Id. 111. with the payment of all his debts, yet that does not 1 Cox's R. Noke 1 Bro. Parl. Of Crown 2 Inst. 19. Dyer, 67 b. 2 Inst. 19. 4 Term R. 408. Favel's Case, Dyer, 160 a. 224 b. 62. Even a testamentary disposition of the personal estate will not exempt it from being applied in payment of debts: for a court of equity will suppose the intention of the testator to have been, that only the residue of his personal estate, after payment of debts, should go to the legatees; unless a contrary intention evidently appears. 63. Lord Coke says that, at common law, the king was entitled to have execution of the body, goods, and lands of his debtor, by virtue of his royal prerogative. By the 8th chapter of Magna Charta, it was stipulated that the king's bailiffs should not seize any lands or rent for debt, as long as the goods and chattels of the debtor sufficed. Nos vero nec ballivi nostri non sesiemus terram aliquam vel redditum pro debito aliquo, quamdiu catalla debitoris præsentia sufficiunt; et ipse debitor paratus est satisfacere. Lord Coke observes that this was an act of grace, restraining the power which the king had before. 64. Where the goods and chattels of the debtor are not sufficient, his real estates become liable. Where the debt is of record, or by specialty, the process is by writ of extent, or extendi facias, returnable in the court of exchequer, by which the sheriff is directed to inquire, by the oaths of lawful men, what lands and tenements the debtor had at the time of the debt contracted. Where the debt arises on simple contract, the practice of the exchequer is, on affidavit of the debt, to direct a commission to inquire of it; and, on inquisition returned, the debt is recorded; and an extent issues. 65. Where the king's debtor dies, the crown may notwithstanding seize his lands and goods. And it is Anon. Saville, said by Fanshawe, remembrancer of the queen, that after the death of any debtor to the crown, process 53. shall issue against the executors, the heir and the terretenants, all together. 66. In a modern case the court of exchequer said, Rex v. Mitchener, that whenever an extent might have issued in a man's Bunb. 118. lifetime, a writ of diem clausit extremum may issue against the estate of a simple contract debtor, where such debt was found by inquisition; though the person was not the king's debtor by record at the time of his death. tracted. Plowd. 321. 67. It is not necessary there should be any contract How con with the king, to make a person a crown debtor. For it was resolved in 2 Eliz. that if any money, goods, or chattels of the king come to the hands of any subject, by matter of record, or by matter in fait, the land of such subject is charged therewith. Cro. Eliz. 68. Sir Walter Mildmay had received annually out Doddingof the exchequer £50, as a fee for his diet, for ton's Case, 30 years together; which was paid by the command 545. of the lord treasurer, who had authority by privy seal to make allowance and payment of all fees and dues; but in truth this was not any fee. The question was, whether Sir Walter's executor should be charged with these sums, so received. It was adjudged that he should be charged; for this payment, by the appointment of the lord treasurer, was not allowable; the privy seal not being an authority to dispose of the queen's treasure, unless where it was due. And he disposing of it otherwise, was out of his authority; therefore the money so paid was a debt due to the crown. 11 Rep. 89. 69. The Earl of Devon being master of the ord. Earl of Devon's Case, nance, obtained of King James I. a privy seal, authorizing him to take and sell broken and unserviceable iron ordnance; the same having theretofore been ante, § 68. Brassey v. Bind the contracted. Gilb. Exch. c. 26. Tit. 14. Tit. 32. c. 8. taken and enjoyed by the masters of the ordnance; by virtue of which the earl took several pieces of iron ordnance, and sold them for his own use. The question was, whether the earl's executors might be charged to the king, for the conversion of the said ordnance. It was resolved that the privy seal, being made on a false suggestion, was void: therefore that the earl's executors were bound to account with the crown for the broken ordnance. 70. It is said, in Doddington's case, that the party receiving must know that it is the king's money. For if a person sells land to a receiver of the king, who pays him for it with the king's money, and the vendor is not privy to it, he shall not be answerable. 71. In a modern case it was held that land tax money, in the hands of the collector, was a crown debt. 72. Lord Chief Baron Gilbert says, all debts due to Lands when the king bind the lands of the debtor, from the time the same were contracted. For the debts that were of record always bound the lands of the debtor; and the debts not of record, by the statute 33 Hen. VIII. c. 39. bind as a statute staple. For all lands being held mediately or immediately of the crown, when any debt was recorded of any person, it laid the estate as liable to that debt, as if it had been a reservation in the first patent. Therefore as the king could seize for the nonpayment of the reserved rents, so he could seize the lands for any debt with which they were charged. 73. In consequence of this doctrine, if a person becomes bound to the king in a bond, and process is issued on it, the writ warrants the sheriff to inquire of and seize the lands of the debtor, which he had at the day when the bond was executed. But if a bond is assigned to the king, the process shall not be to inquire of and seize the lands which the obligor had when he entered into the bond; but only the lands which the obligor had when the bond was assigned. 74. By the statute 13 Eliz. c. 4. § 1. it is enacted, that all the lands, &c. which any treasurer or receiver of the courts of exchequer, or duchy of Lancaster, treasurer of the chamber, cofferer of the household, treasurer for the wars, or of the admiralty or navy, or the mint, receiver of any sums of money imprest, or otherwise, for the use of the queen, her heirs or successors, customer, collector, or farmer of the customs, within any port of the realm, receiver general of the revenues of any county or counties, answerable in the receipt of the exchequer, or the duchy of Lancaster, hath, while he remains accountant, shall, for the payment of the queen, her heirs or successors, be liable and put in execution, in like manner as if the same treasurer, receiver, &c. had, the day he became first officer or accountant, stood bound by writing obligatory, having the effect of a statute staple, to her majesty, her heirs or successors, for payment of the same. Into whose Hands soever they pass. Vide Tit. 32. c. 27. 75. Where lands are once liable to a crown debt, the lien continues, into whose hands soever they pass, even though conveyed by the debtor bona fide, to a purchaser, for a valuable consideration. 76. The only proper and legal discharge of a debt How disdue to the crown is an acquittance from the officers of the exchequer, which is usually called a quietus ; because it generally concluded with these words, abinde recessit quietus. By the statute 27 Eliz. c. 3. Poole v. charged. Shergold, |