case tailor versus wheeler refer to Whitworth v Gaugain Ph hare see also  Abbott v Stratton ir Eq Rep Nov Lord keeper Eq can ab pl pl salk S c a  mortgage co hold land to b but the surrender not be present within the time  limit by the custom become void afterward a become bankrupt on a bill by b  against the assignee this defective surrender be make good post case Richard  Wheeler be seize of a copyhold estate borrow pound of the plaintiff in and  surrender into the hand of two customary tenant the copyhold estate in Vernon  chancery case question to be present at any court after Sep defeasible on pay  the pound and interest the mortgagor pay the interest for four year together  but no care be take to get the surrender present and in the mean time the  mortgagor Wheeler become a bankrupt and die intestate and insolvent after his  death the surrender be tender but the homage refuse to present it because by  the custom of the manor confirm by act of parliament all surrender be to be  void if not present in twelve month after they be make the bill be bring  against the assignee and the heir to be relieve and to supply the defect of  the surrender not be present in time the Lord keeper upon the first hear of  the cause incline to dismiss the plaintiff bill and think it more reasonable  that he shall suffer for his own default than the other creditor but the cause  stand in the paper to be far hear upon the that of Feb and the Lord keeper  have be attend with the precedent of burgh and Francis where the court have  supply the defect of every against JudgmentCreditors he be please to declare  that although upon the hear of the cause he incline not to relieve the  plaintiff because through his neglect of get the surrender present the  creditor may be possible draw in to give the great credit to the bankrupt and  the statute of bankrupt provide if good remain in the hand of the bankrupt  that they shall be liable to the creditor and may be sell as part of the  bankrupt estate notwithstanding any bill of sale c James cap vide the doctrine  on this statute a good deal discuss in brown v Heathcote atk rial v roll  ibidem p yet it be too hard to extend a penal law in a court of equity to the  prejudice of the plaintiff who be in the nature of a purchaser by a defective  conveyance and have contract and agree for a security on those land which the  other creditor have not Vernon chancery case but lend to the bankrupt upon a  general credit and can therefore be entitle to no more than what proper be the  bankrupt and Vernon chancery case er p against the bankrupt himself the  plaintiff have a plain equity and he must have be decree to have supply his  defective conveyance therefore decree the defendant to pay the plaintiff his  principal interest and cost or to be foreclose and the plaintiff to be admit  to hold and enjoy against the defendant the principle upon which the decision  in the principal case go be consider as settle in Whitacre v pawlin ante p  child v Pitt Sel can in Chan finch v earl of Winchelsea p wms and case cite in  note p there south sea company v Wymondsell p wms ex part Dumas atk ves SC  Hinton v Hinton ves walker v burrow atk brown v Heathcote ibidem pie v Daubuz  bro Ch Rep where tenant in tail make a mortgage with covenant for further  assurance and then become bankrupt his assignee hold bind by the covenant  Mitford v Mitford Ves et vide Peter all v soams all ante and case cite in note  p there and see jacobson v Williamson p wms and case cite there