Interest Money
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1744 |
| Date | 01 January 1744 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 21 E.R. 1049
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
[286] CAP. XXXVI. interest money. (A) What Debt shall carry Interest, and from what Time. (B) Where there may be Interest upon Interest. (0) Where the Interest may exceed the Penalty. (D) How Debts, contracted before the Statutes that restrain Usury, shall carry Interest. (E) What Interest a Debt contracted in a Foreign Country shall carry here. (A) what debt shall carry interest, and from what time. 1. If A. gives a Legacy to his Grandaughter an Infant, to be paid at such Time, and in such Manner as his Wife, who was his Executrix, should think fit and best for his 1050 INTEREST MONEY 1EQ. CA. ABE. 287. Granddaughter; and the Executrix lives near twenty Years, and dies without paying the Legacy ; the Legacy shall be paid with Interest from the Death of A. though there was no Demand made of it in the Life of the Executrix. Decreed Trin. 1687, Church-hill and Lady Speake, 1 Vern. 251. A Legacy payable at a certain Day, shall carry Interest from that Day. Vide in Palmer v. Trevor, 1 Vern. 262, but Quaere, whether there must not be a Demand ; for, 2. Where a Legacy was devised to /. S. to be paid at a certain Time, yet it was held, per Lord Keeper, that it should not carry Interest, but from the Time of a Demand made; though otherwise of a Debt. Pasch. 1701, Joliff and Crew. And vide [Smell v. Dee] 2 Salk. 415, where it was held per Cowper, Lord Chancellor, that in case of a Person of full Age, he shall not have Interest but from the Time of Demand; secus of an Infant, because Laches shall not be imputed to him. (Free, in Chan. 161, S. C. and P.) 3. If a Mortgage is forfeited, and the Mortgagor meets the Mortgagee, and says to him, I have Money now, I will come and redeem the Mortgage; and the Mortgagee replies, that he would hold the mortgaged Premisses as long as he could, and when he could hold [287] them no longer, let the Devil take them if he would. And afterwards the Mortgagor goes to the Mortgagee's House with Money, more than sufficient to redeem the Mortgage, and tenders it there; but it does not appear, that the Tender was to the Mortgagee, or that he was within; yet a Redemption will be decreed, and the Mortgagee shall have no Interest from the Time of the Tender, because of his Wilful- ness. Decreed Mich. 15 Car. 2, Manning and Surges, 1 Chan. Ca. 29, and a like Case said to be Peckham and Legay, about a Year before. (2 Freem. 174, accord'.) But for this vide Title Mortgages, Letter (D) [1 Eq. Ca. Abr. 317]. (B) where there may be interest upon interest. * 1. /. S. mortgaged his Estate to the Plaintiff, and died, leaving the Defendant his Daughter and Heir, who was an Infant, and had nothing to subsist on but the Rents of the mortgaged Estate ; and the Interest being suffered to run in Arrear three Years and a Half, the Plaintiff grew uneasy at it, and threatened to enter on the Estate, unless his Interest might be made Principal; upon which the Defendant's Mother, with the Privity of her nearest Relations, stated the Account, and the Defendant herself (who was then near of Age) signed it; and the Account being admitted to be fair, it was held by my Lord Chancellor, that though regularly Interest shall not carry Interest, yet that in some Cases and some Circumstances it would be Injustice if Interest should not be made Principal; and the rather in this Case, because it was for the Infant's Benefit, who, without -this Agreement, would have been destitute of Subsistence. Decreed Pasch. 1699, The Earl of Chesterfield and Lady Cromwell, and affirmed by my Lord Keeper Wright, Mich. 1701. [Mews' Dig. Mortgage, C, 4, a. See Cottrell v. Finney, 1874, L. R. 9 Ch. 548.] 2. If a Mortgagee assigns over the Mortgage, all the Money due to the Mortgagee for Principal and Interest being paid by the Assignee, the Interest shall be accounted Principal in the Hands of the Assignee, but the Account between him and the Mort gagee shall not include the Mortgagor ; neither shall the Interest be accounted Princi pal, unless there was a fair and actual Assignment, and the Money really paid. Pasch. 17 Car. 2, Smith and Pemberton, 1 Chan. Ca. 67; vide [Anonymous] 1 Chan. Ca. 258, S. P. per Lord Keeper, and by him said to be the constant Rule in Equity; and that there was not a Case to contradict it, except that of Porter and Hobart in Lord Shafts- bury's Time; vide [Macclesfield v. Fitton] 1 Vern. 168, 169, S. P., where my Lord Keeper said, that he thought it reasonable that the Interest should carry Interest with Respect to an Assignee; and that though it was resolved otherwise in the House of Lords, in the Case of Porter and Hobart; yet it was on account of the particular Hard ships which attended that Case in all its Circumstances. 3. If A. mortgages for £450, payable at the End of five Years, with Interest at £5 per Cent, in the mean Time; and about two Months before the End of the five Years, the Mortgagee assigns over the Mortgage for £560 being the Principal and Interest then due; the £560 shall carry Interest, though the five Years were not elapsed, the Mortgage being forfeited by the Non-payment of Interest. Decreed Hil. 1690, Glad- man and Henchman, 2 Vern. 135; vide [Anonymous] [288] 1 Chan. Ca. 258, where it was declared by my Lord Chancellor, that it should be a Rule, that a Mortgagee (the Mortgage being forfeited) should have Interest for Interest; but Q. 1 EQ. CA. ABB. 289. INTEREST MONEY 1051 (C) where the interest may exceed the penalty. 1. If one by Will or Deed subject his Lands for the Payment of his Debts, and there is a Debt due by Bond, the Interest of which hath out-run the Penalty, yet it shall not carry Interest beyond the Penalty; for the Design of subjecting the Lands was not to increase the Debt, but to give a farther Security; but if the Devisee or Trustee neglects to pay in a reasonable Time, he shall, after such Neglect, pay Interest Beyond the Penalty; per Cowper, Lord Chancellor [Anonymous], 1 Salk. 154. (Though it be the regular Practice in Equity, as well as at Law, that an Obligor should not pay more than the Penalty of the Bond, the Obligee having chosen his own Security, and made himself Judge...
To continue reading
Request your trial