Kramer v. Ginger, 405 Ill. 17. When the question litigated is whether an absolute conveyance was in fact intended as a mortgage, no matter how the question may arise or be contested, no freehold is involved and the appeal should go to the Appellate Court. Lill v. Pace, 320 Ill. 522; Vincent v. Peterson, 318 Ill. 249; Powers v. Walrath, 311 Ill. 591; Hess v. Bartmann, 311 Ill. 191; Morgan v. Carson, 322 Ill. 141; Rubin v. Midlinsky, 324 Ill. 508; Reagan v. Hooley, 247 Ill. 430; Wendell v. MacKenzie, 307 Ill. 109; Henry v. Britt, 265 Ill. 131. For the reasons assigned, and upon the basis of a long line of authorities, the cause is transferred to the Appellate Court, First District.
" (See, also, Austermuhl v. Wotton, 120 Wn. 376 [207 P. 662]; Eames v. Hardin, 111 Ill. 634; Powers v. Walrath, 235 Ill. App. 180.) [3] Appellants place stress on the fact that respondent took no risk, but required ample security for the return of his investment and profit in the form of the personal obligations of the appellants and a deed of trust on the home of appellant Batchelor.