Martin v. Rapelye — 3 Edw. Ch. 229

Majority

p. 229

Martin v. Rapelye and wife.

July 18, 1838.

Headnote

Parol Agreement. Mortgage.

A parol agreement to give time beyond the period mentioned in the bond and mortgage, cannot avail a mortgagor by answer or otherwise.

Bill of foreclosure. The defendant, in his answer, set up a parol agreement, whereby time was given to the complainant for payment, beyond the time mentioned in the bond and mortgage.

Mr. O’Connor, for the complainant.

p. 230

Sept. 12.

Mr. Clarkson, for the defendants.

This case falls within the principle of Stevens v. Cooper, 1 J. C. R. 425, and the cases there cited by chancellor Kent. The mortgage speaks for itself as to the time when the principal sum is payable; and parol evidence cannot be received of an agreement between the parties at the time of executing the bond and mortgage postponing the time of payment and making it depend upon any other event than the efflux of time. This would vary and contradict the terms of the bond and mortgage.

The complainant is entitled to the usual decree.