295


husband  and  wife  upon  the  security  of  the  "wife'sf^^!^^^'"^ggujtg
«state,  although  the  equity  of  redemption  is  by  the*°^'®'
mortgage    deed  reserved  to    the  husband    and  his
heirs,  or  to  the  husband  and  wife  and  their  heirs,
yet  there  shall  be  a  resulting  trust  for  the  benefit  of
the  wife  and  her  heirs,  and  that  the  wife  or  her  heir
shall  redeem,  and  not  the  heir  of  the  husband,  her
estate  being  in  equity  deemed  only  a  security  for
his  debt.^     But  at  the  same  time,  the  intention  to  intention  mam-
alter  the  previous  title  may  be  manifested  by  the
language  of  the  proviso  itself,  and  there  is  no  ne-
cessity for  an  express  declaration  or  recital  to  that
effect  .2


1  Huntingdon  v.  Huntingdon,  2  Smith  L.  C.  1032 ;  Jackson  v.
Parker,  Amb.  687 ;  Jackson  v.  Innes,  1  Bligh.  104;  Whitbread  v.
Smith,  3  De  G.  M.  &  G.  727 ;  Coote,  523 ;  and  distinguish  the
case  of  Dawson  v.  Bank  of  Whitehaven,  L.  K.  6.  Ch.  Div.
218,  which  was  a  case  of  husband  and  wife  mortgaging  the
husband's  estate,  the'  wife  being  a  concurring  party  in  order
to  release  her  dower  therein.
2  Atkinson  v.  Smith,  3  De  G.  &.  J.  186-192;  Jones  v.  Davies,
L.  R.  8  Ch.  Div.  205.
296


CHAPTER  XVII.
or  EQUITABLE  MORTGAGES  OF  REALTY  BY  DEPOSIT  OF
TITLE-DEEDS.
