case pooley et all versus ray Eq can ab pl pl a mortgage come to a executor  who receive the mortgage money and pay it away to his testator creditor  afterward ft appeal trial the mortgage have be satisfy in the testator  lifetime the executor must refund though he have before pay the money away in  debt which he have not otherwise asset to pay sir John Cordell seize in fee of  a considerable estate in Suffolk be indebt to clement ray the steward of his  court and who be a attorney at law in pound by mortgage date the Jan take in  the name of William tailor and afterward peer William er p sir John Cordell in  may die without issue leave his two sister Elizabeth king and Margaret  Firebrass his heir at law Elizabeth king die leave a infant son now one of the  plaintiff but by her will devise her moiety of the estate to two trustee the  plaintiff pooley and one Golding in fee in trust to join with the other sister  Margaret to raise by sale mortgage c of so much of the estate as be necessary  money sufficient for the payment of her brother sir John debt peer William the  creditor of sir John Cordell bring a bill against the trustee pooley and  Golding to have a sale for payment of their debt and on hear of the cause the  of the late queen a account be decree to be take of sir John personal estate  and if that shall not be sufficient to pay the debt then the trustee be to  join in a sale or mortgage to raise what money be requisite and all the other  creditor of sir John Cordell be to come in before the master to prove their  debt in April clement bay the mortgagee die leave his brother the defendant  Isaac bay executor who come before the master and not admit any of his  mortgagemoney to be pay prove the execution of the deed and so get a report  for his whole principal and interest as due which report be afterward confirm  and make absolute and the money amount to pound be all of it on the three of  November pay by the trustee afterward it appear by a copy of a account under  clement ray own hand that pound S d have be pay by sir John Cordell in his  lifetime upon this the trustee and infant bring a bill to be relieve against  this overpayment the defendant plead the former decree report and proceed but  it be the case of a infant the plea be overrule see Carew v Johnston Sch l  savage v carol ba be Richmond v tayleur post then the defendant answer and  insist that before any notice of the plaintiff demand on account of this  overpayment the defendant as executor of bay have pay away this pound in the  debt of his testator peer William master of the roll let the master see  whether there have be a double payment and as to so much as have be overpay it  must be allow to the plaintiff and pay back by the executor of bay and the  executor to be at liberty to sue such creditor as through mistake he have pay  to make they refund and there be a appeal from this decree to the Lord  chancellor Cowper his lordship affirm the decree declare that though this may  be a hard case yet if the plaintiff have a right to be repay their money which  they have overpay on the mortgage this right can not be overthrow by the  defendant the executor apply the money in any manner he shall think fit any  more than if a executor at law shall recover a debt and pay the testator debt  with it and afterward this judgement recover by the executor be reverse in  error the executor must restore the money to the plaintiff in error and his  have pay it away in debt of his testator will not excuse he from pay it back  so in the same manner if there be a decree for the executor to be pay a sum of  money by the defendant and the executor have receive the money pay it away in  debt and then the defendant against who the executor have recover the decree  bring a appeal and reverse the decree the plaintiff in the appeal shall be  restore to the money by if the defendant have delay the appeal and Willing  stand by while the executor have pay away this money to the testator creditor  for this will be draw the executor into a snare but nothing of this kind  appear in the present case affirm the decree Reg lib b foe his lordship be of  opinion that although the defendant ray payment of pound among his brother  creditor be a accident which fall hard upon he vet it be impossible for the  plaintiff to make they party and there be a evident mistake in the former  account there ought to be a refund by the defendant bay of what he have be  overpay although he have apply the same in satisfaction of his brother debt  and the rather for that it be doubtful whether he do not know how the account  stand between his brother the testator and sir John Cordell before such  application make and do therefore order the say decree to be confirm c peer  William er p