case Elliot and other versus Merriman at the roll July SC wh t l c that Edward  see page v Adam Beav Colyer v finch h l c corser v Cartwright lr h l SC barn  Charles Rep t S devise all his real and personal estate to g his heir c charge  with the payment of his debt the plaintiff who be bind creditor never ask for  their principal but receive their interest regular for year of the executor  who during this interval make several sale of the testator estate it be hold  by the master of the roll that the bill bring by the bind creditor shall be  dismiss and a purchaser shall not be disturb after quiet possession of year Mr  Thomas smith who have both a real and personal estate be indebt to several  person and particular to the plaintiff S and to secure the plaintiff debt he  enter into a bind to they together with one Godwin as a coobligor atkins  Thomas smith by a introductory clause at the beginning of his will charge all  his real and personal estate for the payment of his debt then come the clause  upon which the plaintiff find their claim I devise all my real and personal  estate to Mr Godwin his heir executor administrator and assign charge with the  payment of my debt the testator die in Godwin the devisee be make sole  executor and prove the will he pay the interest of pound per cent regular to  the plaintiff upon their bind till as it be admit on all side nor do they ever  seem desirous of their principal he have make several sale of the testator  estate first of his freehold second of his leasehold and a three sale of a  estate consist of part freehold and part leasehold to Merriman the question  upon the whole be bring to this whether as the devise of the real estate to  Godwin be not a express devise to sell but only charge with debt the vendee in  this case take the estate cum load as the vendor do the master of the roll be  of opinion direct a estate to be sell do not imply that it must be S ld at all  event if the debt can be satisfy without subject a estate to debt without give  a absolute power to sell do not guard the estate from be sell if debt can be  pay otherwise see ante vol as to the leasehold estate they be out of the case  for if a man purchase such a estate from a executor it cease to be a trust  upon the land for where money be want a executor must sell for to entertain a  doubt to the contrary will make it impossible for a executor to raise asset as  no person will venture to buy see ewer v Corbet p W Nugenty Gifford ante vol  and note mead v Lord orrery post vol ithel v bean Ves jacomb v Harwood Ves  Walev booth durn and east in note length of time be no favourable circumstance  for creditor for have they come recent and prevail against the purchaser he  may have have his satisfaction over against the vendor who be then in good  circumstance for his bankruptcy be many year afterward where the debtor have  charge a estate by will with the payment of debt and the creditor after the  death of testator accept of the executor bind it be as a new security and be  as a circumstance to show that he rely more upon the credit of the executor  than the charge in the will atkins there be no difference between a express  devise of a estate in trust to be sell and a estate charge in trustee hand for  the payment of debt without a express power to sell in either case a executor  have a equal right to do it the court choose rather to abide by their general  rule than to let in nice distinction in order to relieve particular person  though even in the case of creditor themselves where creditor have so easy a  remedy as to bring a bill against a devisee in trust of land to compel a sale  when the annual produce be not sufficient to pay debt they shall not disturb a  fair purchaser who have be in quiet possession for year of the trust estate  the bill be dismiss without cost as to those creditor who do not appear to  have express notice of the defendant purchase atkins er p