20 mznmnnr. msroarrnn.
an anxiety on his part to see his relative and partner in business, Hans-
· ford James, get out of debt; and this seems to have been one of the ob-
jects of Hansford James in selling, for we find him, after getting part of
the purchase money from McCormack, trying to pay off the deed of trust
debt to Henry Horne, who then held it, but who refused to receive Con-
federate money. David E. James had no interest in the debt at that
time, nor did he have any until four years thereafter, when he repur-
_ chased it. He could have had no motive in concealing the existence of
the deed of trust, or for fraudulently influencing McCormack to purchase
the land. ,
It is to be noted that the cases of estoppel referred to by the counsel for
the plaintiff, and cited by the text writers, are instances of latent, con-
· cealed, or unrecorded incumbrances. See 1 Story, Eq. J ur. §§ 398, 399.
No case has been cited in argument, and the court has found none in the
investigation of this question, where the beneficiary in a recorded deed
of trust or mortgage has been estopped from asserting his lien on the
ground of concealment, fraud, or misrepresentation to a purchaser of the
land. It seems that a registered lien has been regarded by the courts
and text writers as constructive notice to the purchaser of the land.
What has been said heretofore with regard to aregistered deed of trust
being constructive notice to a purchaser for value is equally applicable
to this branch of the plaintifils exception No. 2, and need not be re-
peated. There were a few other points called to the attention of the
court in the argument, but as they are not raised in the pleadings, it is
not necessary that they be noticed or acted upon by the court. .
There was, however, one question presented to the court, while not
raised in the pleadings, which isapparent upon the record, and the court
will dispose ofit. It is as to the validity of the certificate of the justice
taking the acknowledgment of Hansford James to the deed of trust to
Ward, dated April 25, 1861. The certificate is as follows:
" Virginia, to-wit: Smyth County, to-wit: This is to certify that Hans-
ford James, whose name appears signed to the within deed, came this day be-
fore me, Robert C. Williams, acting justice for said county, and acknowledged
the same to be his act and deed, and desired me to certify the same to the
. clerk of the county court of said county, that it may be duly recorded. Wit-
ness my band and seal this 25th day of April, 1861.
"R. C. WILLIAMS, J. P."
The provision of the statute of Virginia, as to the certificate of ac-
knowledgment to be taken by _a justice, is as tbllows:
"Such court or clerk shall also admit every such writing to rec0rd,_ as to
any person whose name is signed thereto, upon a certificate of his acknowl-
edgment before a justice or notary public within the United States, written
on or annexed to the same to the following effect, to-wit: County of ————,
_ to-wit: I, -———, a justice of the peace for the county aforesaid, in the state
of -———-, do certify that -—, whose name is signed to the writing above _
(or hereto annexed) bearing date on the ——-—- day of ————, has acknowl-
— edged the same before me in my county aforesaid.
"Given under my hand this —— day of ——."
- See Code 1860, c. 121, § 3.