case DEMANDRAY versus Metcalf vern and S c Eq Abr S c pale yellow Rep S c atk  S c cite a borrow pound on the pawn of some jewel afterward he borrow three  several sum for each of which he give his note without take notice of the  jewel his executor shall not redeem the jewel without pay the money due on the  note this be a case wherein my Lord chancellor take time to consider and be  attend with precedent and be short thus a man borrow pound on the pawn of some  jewel worth about pound and take a note from the pawnee acknowledge the jewel  to be precedent in chancery in his hand for secure of the pound afterward the  pawner borrow at several time three several other sum of money of the pawnee  and give his note for each sum without take any manner of notice of the jewel  and die his executor bring this bill to redeem the jewel on payment of the  pound first lend thereon and interest and the only question be whether they  shall not likewise pay the other sum secure by their testator note before they  shall be admit to redeem and the plaintiff be to produce precedent that the  redemption may be on payment of the first sum and interest only but can not  find any precedent my Lord chancellor now give his opinion that the plaintiff  must pay all the money due on the several note and say since there be no  precedent to guide he he think the constant maxim of this court sufficient for  that purpose videlicet that he who will have equity or come hither for equity  must do equity and since the plaintiff can have back these jewel without the  assistance of this court it be reasonable and just he shall pay the defendant  all money due to he for it be natural to suppose the pawnee will not have lend  he those sum but on the credit of the pledge he have in his hand before and  say the near case he can find that come to this be the case of saint John and  Holford Chan case though he agree that case may be distinguish from this be  between the heir of the mortgagor and surety but he say though the reason he  now give for his opinion be not mention in that case as the reason of the  resolution yet the case will well enough have admit it and the decree be  accord but Mr Vernon say if there have be any creditor of the pawner by bind  or a commission of bankruptcy out against he the defendant must come behind  they for his debt on the several note and can not have tack they to the pawn  so as to prefer himself before they but that not be precedent in chancery the  present case my Lord decree that if the plaintiff will redeem the time for  payment be lapse he must pay all and he likewise declare his opinion that if  the first sum have be secure by a mortgage of land he shall not have be admit  to redeem after the day for payment be lapse without pay likewise all that be  due to the mortgagee on note or simple contract otherwise if such subsequent  debt have be secure by bind