
    Hollis et al. vs. Saulsbury, Respess & Company.
    [Warner, Chief Justice, being engaged in presiding over the senate organized as a court of impeachment, did not sit in this case.]
    The sheriff levied a mortgage/, fa. upon corn of defendant, having in his hands no other execution against defendant; it was sold as perishable property by order of the ordinary under section 3648 of the Code, and bid in by the defendant in fi.fa., and knocked off to him. An agreement was then made between defendant and the sheriff, that if defendant would pay up the principal, interest, and costs on the mortgage/./®., he should have the corn, otherwise the agent of plaintiffs in the mortgage execution who was the next highest bidder, was-to have if at his bid; defendant paid off the - mortgage/, fa. and took the corn. On a rule against the sheriff by the plaintiffs in the mortgage/./®., which was returnable to Sumter superior court and to a term not yet held, older executions claimed the proceeds of the corn in the sheriff’s hands:
    
      Held, 1. That the court of the county of the sheriff had jurisdiction to rule him, though the mortgage /. fa. was returnable to á subsequent term of another county. #
    
    2. That the lien of the older judgments not in the sheriff’s hands was not divested by the sale and agreement between the sheriff and the defendant in execution; that the corn was still liable to be sold at their instance, and that the money was properly paid to the mortgage fi.fa. 56 Ga., 383; 17 Ib., 187.
   Jackson, Justice.  