"By the settled law of this court, the grantee is not directly liable to the mortgagee at law or in equity; and the only remedy of the mortgagee against the grantee is by bill in equity in the right of the mortgagor and grantor, by virtue of the right in equity of a creditor to avail himself of any security which his debtor holds from a third person for the payment of the debt.

—the question of the remedy of the mortgagee, whether at law or in equity, was to be decided by the law of the place where the suit was brought.

Columbia exercises both legal and equitable Jurisdiction, but the procedure, as In iederal courts, is distinct.

It is by no means a universal rule that a person may sue upon a contract made for his benefit, to which he was not a party.

Whatever be the obligations created by the assumptions contained in the deeds to Mrs. Brown, and the bond which was furnished by Brown, it is clear that the Mission has only the rights of Meserve, and therefore can assert only such cause of action, legal or equitable, as Meserve may possess.

The case having been submitted to the circuit court upon a statement of facts agreed by the parties, or case stated, upon which the court was to render such judgment as the law required, all questions of the sufficiency of the pleadings were waived, and the want of an answer was immaterial, and no finding of facts by the court was necessary.

So long as the equity had any value, it was naturally in Galliher's interest to prevent foreclosure, and he may well have desired to increase the value of his equity by partially removing the lien.

—in error to the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, it was held that the question whether the remedy of the mortgagee against the grantee of the mortgagor to enforce an agreement contained in the deed to him to pay the mortgage debt, be at law or in equity, was governed by the lex fori, and that in the District of Columbia such remedy was by bill in equity only.

A materialman is not a party thereto in the strict common law sense and he cannot therefore proceed thereon at law in the District of Columbia.