Andrew Newport S case in this case which be upon a assignment of a mortgage  make by Kendal and after by diverse mean assignment vest in Newport executor  of secretary Coventry it be object first that it do not appear that any money  be pay upon the original mortgage and therefore it be fraudulent and it be  fraudulent in the creation though secretary Coventry pay a valuable  consideration yet this will not purge the fraud and make it good against the  defendant who be a purchaser good fide and for a valuable consideration non  allocatur for holt chief justice say the first mortgage be good between the  party and be so when the first mortgagee assign for a valuable consideration  this be all one as if the first mortgage have be upon a valuable consideration  for now the second mortgagee stand in his place and therefore be within the  proviso of the statute of Elizabeth cap that no mortgage good fide and upon  good consideration shall be impeach by force of this Act but it shall stand in  such force as before the Act make and if this proviso do not extend to the  case to what case shall it extend second it be object that the assignment be  not good it not be upon the land nor the mortgagor a party and the mortgagee  never be in possession and though the first assignment be good upon the  presumption that the mortgagor be tenant at will and so his possession the  possession of Skinner the mortgagee yet by the assignment the will be  determine and the mortgagor be not tenant at will to the second assignee non  allocatur for though he be not tenant at will to the second assignee yet he be  not a seize but a tenant at sufferance and if no seize be make then no right  be divest and no seize can be without a tortuous entry and here there be no  new entry and therefore though he be tenant at sufferance yet the mortgagee  his estate not be divest and turn to a right may assign then it be object that  though the mortgagee be not by this out of possession yet he may be out of  possession in this case at his election and he have make his election here to  be out of possession for he have bring a ejection strong and by it admit  himself to be out of possession for the ejectment complain of a tortuous entry  and a ouster and this be a matter of record he be estopped to say the non  allocatur for first per curian a ejectment as it be in common practice be but  a feign action to which the lessor of the plaintiff who be the principal  person be not a party and not be a party this can be give in evidence as a  estoppel against he and therefore he can maintain a action for the mean profit  without a actual entry but the lessee may and it have be rule that the bring  of a ejectment be not such a entry or claim which shall avoid a fine and  nonclaim for five year and as to the objection upon the assignment it be  further say by Giles eyres justice that when the mortgagee for himself his  executor administrator and assignee covenant with the mortgagor that he shall  enjoy and take the profit till default of payment the covenant be for his  assign this will rule the whole case and he shall be presume tenant at will to  all the assign as well as to the first mortgagee this be rule upon evidence at  a trial at bar in this case