In all jurisdictions, including those in which there is no vendor's lien by implication of law, it is recognized that the vendor may, by an express provision in the instrument of conveyance, create a lien in his own favor for a part or the whole of the purchase price.15 A lien so created has been referred to by the courts as closely approximating to a mortgage in character and effect,16 and it has been said to be "a mode of realizing the purely equitable conception of a mortgage, stripped of all its legal forms and features."17 But there seems a difficulty in this view, that the language creating the lien is in effect a purchase money mortgage inserted in the instrument of conveyance, as applied to cases in which the conveyance is not executed by the purchaser, the grantee, since for the purpose of a mortAffee, 41 Ga. 684; Lord v. Wilcox, 99 Ind. 491; Kendrick v. Eggleston, 56 Iowa, 128, 41 Am. Rep. 90, 8 N. W. 786; McGonigal v. Plummer, 30 Md. 422; Fonda v. Jones, 42 Miss. 792, 2 Am. Rep. 669; Hunt v. Marsh, 80 Mo. 396; Boies v. Benham, 127 N. Y. 620, 14 L. R. A. 55, 28 N. E. 657; Marshall v. Christmas, 3 Humph. (Tenn.) 616, 39 Am. Dec. 199.

14. Mackreth v. Symmons, 15 Ves. 329; Cook v. Atkins, 173 Ala. 363, 56 So. 224; Holman v. Patterson's Heirs, 29 Ark. 357; Thompson v. Corrie, 57 Md. 197; Walton v. Hargroves, 42 Miss. 18, 97 Am. Dec. 429; Ogden v. Thornton, 30 N. J. Eq. 569; Kent v. Gerhard, 12 R. I. 92, 34 Am. Rep. 612; Zwingle v. Wilkinson, 94 Tenn. 246, 28 S. W. 1096.

15. 3 Pomeroy, Eq. Jur. Sec. 1257; Bell v. Pelt, 51 Ark. 433, 4 L. R. A. 247, 14 Am. St. Rep. 57. 11 S. W. 684; Greeno v. Barnard, 18 Kan. 518; Morrison v. Brown, 83 I11. 562; Carr v. Thompson, 67 Mo 472; Jackson v. Rutledge, 3 Lea (Tenn.) 626, 31 Am. Rep. 655; Helm v. Weaver, 69 Tex. 143, 6 S. W. 420; Kern v. Coffin, 203 Fed. 238, 121 C. C. A. 480. See Hiester v. Green, 48 Pa. St. 96, 86 Am. Dec. 569.

16. Ober v. Gallagher, 93 U. S. 199, 23 L. Ed. 829; King v. Young Men's Ass'n, 1 Woods, 386, Fed. Cas. No. 7,811; Markoe v. Andras, 67 I11. 34; Dingley v. Bank of Ventura, 57 Cal. 467; Ufford v. Wells, 52 Tex. 612.

17. 3 Pomeroy, Eq. Jur. Sec. 1257.

No particular language is necessary to give rise to this lien, provided an intention to that effect is clearly expressed,20 and such declaration of intention may, it has been held, be incorporated in notes given for the price,21 though a mere recital that the purchase money or a part thereof is unpaid is insufficient for the purpose.22

The lien may be asserted against the land in the hands of all persons other than subsequent bona fide purchasers for value.23 Although in some cases subse18. Ante Sec. 661, note 60.

18a. In Stringfellow v. Ivie 73 Ala. 209, it is said that a vendor's lien cannot arise otherwise than by operation of law without an agreement manifested by writing. But in Putman v. Summer-lin, 168 Ala. 390, 53 So. 101, it is explicitly decided that a vendor's lien may be expressly reserved without the execution of the instrument by the grantee.

19. Ante Sec. 660.

20. Moore v. Lackey, 53 Miss. 85; 3 Pomeroy, Eq. Jur. Sec. 1256, note.

21. Smith v. Hiles-Carver Co., quent purchasers are said to be charged with notice of the lien by reason of the record of the conveyance in which the lien is reserved,24 the proper view appears to be that one is so chargeable by reason of the fact thai the conveyance is in his chain of title, so that the record vel non of such conveyance is, at least in the ordinary case, immaterial.25

107 Ala. 272, 18 So. 37; Bell v. Pelt, 51 Ark. 433, 4 L. R. A. 247,14 Am. St. Rep. 571, 11 S. W. 684; Shanefelter v. Kenworthy, 42 Ind. 501; Hobson v. Edwards, 57 Miss. 128; Osbourne v. Royer, 1 Lea (Tenn.) 217; Buckley v. Runge, - Tex. Civ. App. - , 136 S. W. 533.

22. Hiester v. Green, 48 Pa St. 96, 86 Am. Dec. 569.

23. Cooper v. Green, 28 Ark. 48; Eichelberger v. Gitt, 104 Pa. St, 64; Bevins v. Ryland, 23 Ky. L. Rep. 1061, 64 S. W. 752; Sitz v. Diehl, 55 Mo. 17; Lincoln v. Purcell, 2 Head (Tenn.) 143, 73 Am. Dec. 196.

The benefit of the lien, which arises by reason of an express declaration of intention to that effect, passes as an incident of the claim for the purchase money upon an assignment of such claim.26