— It is useless, to cite English authorities in this case; for, it has been repeatedly decided in our courts, that the law is not the same in Pennsylvania.

— There is, however, an obvious and material distinction between a levy on household furniture, and on merchandise or *186■goods for salo. In the former case, the court has never allowed the plaintiff to lose the lien of a prior execution levied, because, on principles of humanity, he allowed the furniture to remain on the premises, in the possession of the defendant. But it would be going farther than the reason of our decisions, and might introduce collusion and fraud, if we were to authorize or countenance such a practice, indiscriminately, in every case.

Bv the Court. — We are of opinion, therefore, that the purchaser of the bricks is entitled to hold them, entirely discharged from the lien of the execution. (a)