c Howard v harris S c Charles can vern Eq can ab mortgage when redeemable sir  Robert Howard by a settlement in the family be tenant for life with remainder  to Henry his first son sell the land in question to the defendant afterward  freeman er p he die his son Henry defeat the say purchase by virtue of the say  settlement and in the year mortgage the same to the defendant for five hundred  pound and then settle the same upon his wife the plaintiff for a addition to  her jointure voluntary afterward the say Henry Howard take up five hundred  pound more of the defendant and in the deed the proviso be that if he or the  heir male of his body shall pay c then to be void and a covenant that no  person shall redeem but he and the heir male of his body and covenant likewise  that the money shall be pay prout Henry Howard die without issue male and the  plaintiff be his widow and entitle herself by virtue of the say deed of  settlement prefer her bill to redeem and a redemption be decree by the Lord  chancellor finch the cause be now reheard on the defendant part it be insist  that here be exclusive word no person exclude by they shall redeem freeman for  the mortgagor be master of his own estate may part with it upon what term he  please and here it do plain appear that his intent be that no person but  himself and the heir male of his body shall redeem but the Lord keeper confirm  the decree for it be a security for money once and there be a covenant to pay  the money by which covenant the mortgagor and his executor be perpetual oblige  and beside there be no consideration pay for this exclusive covenant he decree  a redemption accord to the former decree but seem to be of opinion that if  there have be any particular agreement and a consideration pay those exclusive  word may have be effectual but other be of opinion to the contrary for once a  mortgage and always redeemable and no negative word shall exclude the  mortgagor ante c p and it be compare to a distress for rend that although  there be a covenant in the deed that if the rend be behind the party may  distrain and hold the distress irreplevisable that notwithstanding the party  may repleuie but a case be cite by Mr solicitor in the house of lord that  where a man make a purchase and a agreement be make between the vendor and  vendee that in case the purchase money be repay within seven year that he will  reconvey there if the money be not repay in the seven year the party be not  bind afterward to reconvey there be no interest to be pay nor any coven ant to  pay the money In the case put the agreement be rather one for repurchase than  for limit redemption see post c p and the absence of a covenant for payment of  the money though such covenant be not absolute essential to constitute a  mortgage be material as explain the nature of the transaction and the  intention of the party Mellor v lees atk Floyer v Lavington p wms goodman v  Grierson ball and Beatrice post c p see also post c p