case finch et all versus earl of Winchelsea refer to Whitworth v Gaugain Ph  one agree for a valuable consideration to convey land to I S and afterward  confess a judgement to I n if the considerationmoney pay by I S be any way  adequate to the value of the land it bind the land in equity and shall defeat  the judgement by of a mortgage or if the consideration be inadequate the  countess dowager of Winchelsea be jointress for her life of the premise  remainder in tail to the late earl remainder over the late earl enter into a  agreement with the countess that in case she will make to he a conditional  surrender of her estate for life in order to enable he to mortgage part of the  premise he will settle the residue of the premise together with the equity of  redemption upon himself for life remainder to his first c son remainder over  under which the plaintiff claim peer William the countess dowager accord make  her conditional surrender and the late earl suffer a recovery and make the  mortgage and afterward die without peer William er p ever settle the premise  pursuant to his agreement be indebt at his death by bind and judgement and  this agreement be not in write but be acknowledge b several letter under the  late earl hand the person on who these remainder be to be settle bring their  bill to have this agreement execute and have a decree Trin for a execution  thereof before Lord chancellor Harcourt which decree be affirm by the house of  lord and now the question before Lord chancellor Cowper be whether the  judgement creditor of the late Lord Winchelsea shall be pay their judgement be  puisne to the agreement for the plaintiff it be object that from the time that  the late earl enter into this agreement it be a agreement make upon a valuable  consideration he the late earl be but a trustee for the use in the settlement  so agree to be make as aforesaid and if a trustee confess a judgement at or  statute though at law these be liens upon the estate yet in equity they will  not affect it because the estate in equity will not belong to the trustee but  to the cestuique trust that if one article to buy a estate and pay his  purchasemoney and afterward the person who agree to sell acknowledge a  judgement or statute to peer William a three person who have no notice yet  this judgement shall not in equity affect the estate because from the time of  the article and payment of the money the person agree to sell will be only a  trustee for the intend purchaser which be admit and affirm by the Lord  chancellor it be grant that if in this case Lord Winchelsea or any other  person that have be a trustee in possession have make a mortgage of the  premise for a valuable consideration and without notice such mortgagee in  regard he may have plead his mortgage and will have be as a purchaser without  notice shall have hold place against the intend purchaser or cestuique trust  for there the money will have be lend upon the title and credit of the land  and have attach upon the land vide post Vol two brace v duchess of Marlborough  which will not be so in the case of a judgement creditor who for ought appear  may have take out execution against the person or good of the party that grave  the judgement and a judgement be only a general security not a specific lie  upon the land also it be urge that as the agreement bind the late earl so it  shall bind all claim under he consequent the judgement creditor of the late  earl can have no better title than he himself have for which purpose Mr Vernon  cite the case of burgh v Francis Eq can ab pl decree by Lord keeper Bridgman  and affirm by Lord chancellor Nottingham where there be a defective mortgage  in fee for pound it be make by way of feoff without livery and after this the  mortgagor confess a judgement to a three person nevertheless the estate be in  equity peer William specifical bind by the mortgage it be decree that the  mortgage shall be prefer to the judgement though at law the former be in  strictness void the judgement creditor will have take place so in the case of  tailor v Wheeler vern decree by Lord keeper Cowper Nov one seize in fee of a  copyhold make a mortgage thereof to I S but the surrender be not present at  the next court by mean whereof it become in law void and afterward the  copyholder the mortgagor ho have all along continue in possession become a  bankrupt and though on a dispute between the mortgagee and creditor it be  object that it be the mortgagee own fault that he do not procure the surrender  to be present and that this be probable with a ill intent videlicet to wrong  the lord of his fine that the cop holder be in possession and the visible  owner of the estate this may and in all likelihood do induce his creditor to  trust he as think his estate will be liable to their debt that it be  reasonable that all the creditor of the bankrupt shall come in equal and the  mortgagee only for his proportion his mortgage be void at law and consequent  liable to the bankruptcy and that equality be the high equity yet it be decree  on great deliberation that this mortgage though void at law be notwithstanding  a equitable lie upon the copyhold estate and shall be make good in equity and  bind the assignee of the commission of bankruptcy and all the creditor on the  other side it be insist that creditor be the favourite of all court of law and  much more in equity that since these creditor now before the court have a  remedy at law for their debt it will be invert the proper business of a peer  William er p court of equity to defeat they of instead of help peer William  they to their just debt which without the interposition of equity they will  recover that in the late earl of Pembroke case upon his marriage with the now  countess dowager it be agree she shall have a rend of pound per annum jointure  and the method advice by counsel for secure it be by demise and redemise  videlicet the late earl demise his manor and land in Glamorganshire to the  countess trustee for ninetynine year who redemised the premise to the late  earl for ninetyeight year reserve pound per annum during the countess life to  commence after the late earl death the land be of about double that value  after which the late earl of Pembroke die great indebt by simple contract and  though it be object that this term of ninetyeight year be redemised to the  late earl as a method only propose by counsel to serve a particular end ought  such end be serve to attend the inheritance and though it be once so decree in  Lord chancellor Jeffereys time vern yet that decree be afterward reverse vern  and the reversal acquiesce under by the heir of the late Lord Pembroke for it  be legal asset equity shall never take from a creditor what at law he be  entitle to that the creditor be now in nature of defendant they come in before  the master and consent to be bind by the decree of the court and the plaintiff  be ask the court to take away the benefit of the law from honest and just  creditor that this case be not like that of a trustee out of possession for  the late earl who contract these debt by judgement be in possession and as he  be seize of the legal estate in fee peer William so be he also the visible as  well as the legal owner of the estate and upon the credit of this estate may  be suppose to have be trust for this money and the judgement creditor may  think himself safe by mean of the land and lend upon that that there be little  difference betwixt a mortgage and a judgement and yet it have be admit that if  one article to sell and after receive the money and then mortgage before he  convey to the purchaser the mortgagee shall hold the mortgage it may be grant  that in the case cite of a man make a defective conveyance and become bankrupt  the creditor shall not avoid it any more than the bankrupt himself because the  creditor stand in the bankrupt place and can do no more than he can have do  himself post jacobson v William and bosvile v Brander but that in the  principal case the plaintiff claim under this agreement be in fault that the  do not make fresh suit but delay it nine year whereas they ought to have come  before for a execution of this agreement which will probable have prevent  these creditor from lend their money or if they have take a security of the  premise pendent light it will not have avail they Lord chancellor Cowper  article make for a valuable consideration and the money pay will in equity  bind the estate and prevail against any judgement creditor mesne betwixt the  article and the conveyance but this must be where the consideration pay be  somewhat adequate to the thing purchase for if the money pay be but a small  sum in respect of the value of the land this shall not prevail over a mesne  judgement creditor peer William in the principal case the consideration be not  adequate for the countess dowager of Winchelsea with who the agreement be make  part with no money have only make a conditional surrender in order for a  common recovery beside I know the inducement with the lord to affirm the  decree be the plaintiff proposal to pay the debt by judgement and bind and the  decree intend to provide that the settlement shall not prejudice the creditor  for which reason though that clause be leave out in the decree below yet since  the consideration be not adequate it shall not be so far regard in equity as  to bar a judgement creditor who have a legal lie upon the estate see Freemoult  v Dedire post Kennedy v Daly Sch l Fonb Eq note u earl Heneage the grandfather  of Charles the late earl have several son by his second wife and one son John  the present plaintiff Elizabeth his four wife who be the countess dowager  mention in this case Lord Maidstone old son of earl Heneage and father of the  late earl Charles die in the lifetime of earl Heneage peer William er p earl  Charles succeed his grandfather and upon the death of earl Charles without  issue the title descend upon his uncle the present earl who be the next  brother to Lord Maidstone the settlement make by earl Charles be in favour of  his half uncle the plaintiff in exclusion of his uncle of the whole blood vide  Reg lib a foe so Russell v Russell bro c c Featherstone v Fenwick and Harford  v carpenter ib note the general assignee of a bankrupt shall be subject to the  same equity as the bankrupt himself be at the time of the commission vide  jacobson v William post Reg lib a foe this cause come on to be hear for  further direction after reference to the master to state the several claim  upon the estate his lordship declare that the consideration of the agreement  make by the say Charles late earl of Winchelsea be the give he a power to  charge pound on the jointure estate of Elizabeth countess dowager of  Winchelsea after her death and the question be whether the say power be a  consideration so adequate to the settlement that be to be make for the same as  that the say agreement ought to prevail against the creditor of the say earl b  judgement or bind and that his lordship be of opinion that the plaintiff  equity to have the say agreement perform be not strong enough to stand in the  way of the say creditor who have a legal lie on the say estate for that if all  the say creditor of the say earl shall come in and be pay their debt the  estate to be settle will still be a over value for what the say countess part  with which be only a liberty to raise the say pound and that not to take place  during her life but only on the reversion belong to the say earl for which all  the residue of the estate be to be settle in remainder on her son which be  very considerable after the debt pay and his lordship further declare that  this his opinion be agreeable to the order make upon hear the cause in which  the like regard be have to the creditor of the say late earl and which have cc  since be confirm on appeal to the house of lord then follow direction to the  master to sell a sufficient part of the estate for payment of the creditor  peer William de term S michaelis