sumed from the possession of the vendor, or from his particular situation, and no further proof is required. (a) But abstracts of title are constantly prepared and required of certain particular personal chattels, such as monies in the public funds, canal shares, &c., which are frequently the subject of long and intricate documents.

The chief precaution to be taken in purchases or mortgages of personal chattels, is to see that the validity of the transaction will be in no way defeated or affected by the statutes of Elizabeth (b) against the fraudulent assignment of goods, and the various acts providing against frauds upon creditors by bankrupts. It is beside the purpose of this work to inquire what is within these acts.

We shall now mention all the different titles of personal chattels, which usually demand the attention of the conveyancing counsel: and this chapter may be divided into-I. Titles of legacies, policies of assurance, and other choses en action.-II. Titles of stock in the public funds.-III. Titles of shares in companies. -IV.Titles of next presentations.-V. Titles of ships. -VI. Titles of literary property.-VII. Titles of goods.-VIII. Titles of good-wills.

R

I. TITLES OF LEGACIES, POLICIES OF INSURANCE, AND OTHER choses en action.

It is a general rule of the common law, that a right or title, that is not in possession or vested in right,

(a) 1 Ves. 360; 1 Atk. 168; 7 T. R. 234; 13 Ves. 122. Malone v. Reynolds, 2 Fox & S. 59. But the purchaser of personal chattels from a tenant for life will not be sesure against the claims of those in

titled in remainder, Cowp. 432; 3 Atk. 44; 3 V. & B. 16.

(b) 13 Eliz. C. 5.; 27 Eliz. C. 4; 30 Eliz. c. 18.

(c) See Sug. Vend. & P. 636659, 7th edition.

cannot be granted or assigned to strangers. (a) There are, however, exceptions to this rule, even at common law. Thus, where there is a defined and ascertained debt due from A. to B., and a debt to the same or to a larger amount, due from C. to A., and the three agree that C. shall be B.'s debtor instead of A., and C. promises to pay B., the latter may maintain an action against C.; but in such an action, it is incumbent on the plaintiff to show that at the time when C. promised to pay B., there was an ascertained debt due from A. to B. (b) So also a chose en action may be assignable by the custom of merchants; as, for instance, a hill of exchange. (c) And choses en action may clearly be conveyed in equity, although the action, if necessary, must be in the name of the assignor. Therefore, policies of insurance, bond debts, book debts, monies due on contract, legacies, &c., may all be assigned in equity. (d)

1. Legacies. Where a legacy is assigned, the assent of the executor to the legacy should be proved, because without it the assignment will be invalid. An executor can assent before probate, but a purchaser has a right to insist on the probate of the will, as otherwise he will have no legal mode of proving the assent. (e) Where there are two or more executors, the assent of any one or more of them is sufficient. (f) And it is clear that an executor may assent to a bequest to him

(a) See Marquis of Winchester's case, 3 Co. 2 b.

(b) Fairlie v. Denton, 8 B. & C. 395; and see Tatlock v. Harris, 3 T. R. 180. Wharton v. Walker, 4 B. & C. 166. Cuxon and another v. Chadley, 3 B. & C. 591.

(c) Johnson v. Collings, 1 East, 98.

(d) See Ryall v. Rolle, 1 Atk. 165. S. C. 1 Ves. 348. Jones v. Gibbons, 9 Ves. 407. Ex parte Burton, 1 Gl. & Jam. 207.

(e) See 3 Prest. Abs. 146; Dy. 367. See post.

(f) Went. Off. Ex. 225. Holkirk

v. Holkirk, 4 Madd. 51.

self, (a) and if an executor once assent to a legacy, it would seem that he can never afterwards retract it. (b)

Where an unreceived legacy is sold or mortgaged to two different persons, at different times, an important rule has lately been laid down, that he who shall first give notice to the executor of his claim on the fund, shall acquire the superior title. (c) And the same rule applies to the purchase, mortgage, or charge of any other equitable interest.

In case of a purchase, mortgage, or other charge of an unreceived legacy, or other equitable interest, therefore, the purchaser or incumbrancer should immediately give notice to the executor, trustee, or other legal owner in whom it is vested; for if he is the first purchaser or incumbrancer, he will thus secure his priority; if the second or third, he may thus obtain a precedence over the former purchasers or incumbrancers: but before completing the purchase, or charge, inquiry should always be made of the legal owner, as to its being charged or incumbered; and if an answer in the negative is returned, the validity of the transaction may thus be rendered certain. If the interest is derived under a deed which is in the possession of the executor or trustee, notice of the sale or incumbrance should, if possible, be endorsed on it, as that will operate as a further security in fixing a second incumbrancer with notice of the first transaction.

2. Policies of Insurance.-In purchasing a policy of insurance on the life of another, it will be proper, if possible, to see that the allegations contained in the policy as to the age and the health of the life insured

(a) Perk. s. 572. Townson v. Tickell, 3 B. & A. 40.

(b) SeeWent. Off. Ex. 227. Mead v. Lord Orrery, 3 Atk. 238. See further

as to Legacies, post. Chapter XI.
(c) See Dearle v. Brown, 3 Russ. 1.
Loveridge v. Cooper, 3 Russ. 58.

are true; because on the truth of these allegations depends the validity of the contract. (a)

Where a person insures his own life, and dies by suicide, duelling, or the hands of justice, according to the stipulation of most insurance offices, the money insured cannot be recovered. In some offices, (b) although a person die under such circumstances in a duel, the money may, nevertheless, be recovered. And if there be no exception as to death by the hands of justice, and the person insuring his life afterwards suffers death for a criminal offence, the policy will not be avoided, and the money may be recovered. (c) But if a person insures the life of another, the death of the insured in any of these ways will not affect the policy. And if a man insures his own life, and makes a bonâ fide assignment of the policy to another, and notice be given to the office, it would seem that his death by suicide, &c. would not vitiate the policy; and some offices insert a stipulation to this effect in their forms.

A purchaser of a policy must also see the last premium has been paid upon it, as otherwise it would be void. (d)

A policy of insurance effected by a bankrupt, on his own life, passes to his assignees, however small the apparent value may be at the time of his bankruptcy. (e)

A policy on the life of a person always contains a stipulation, more or less restricted, that the person whose life is insured shall not go abroad without paying additional premiums. Where, therefore, a policy

is assigned, or where the life of another is insured, care must be taken in seeing that the person is not abroad; and if he go abroad, that proper information may be conveyed to the purchaser, in order that he may pay the additional premiums.

A policy of assurance was effected in the Equitable Insurance Office by a Mr. Newman on his own life, and assigned by him, subject to redemption, along with a policy of another office, to the defendants, as a security for the repayment of a debt. He afterwards repaid a part of the sum lent, and received the other policy back again. No notice of the assignment was ever given to the Equitable Insurance Office, and Mr. Newman became bankrupt, and the plaintiffs were chosen his assignees; the policy was afterwards sold to Mr. Briggs for one thousand pounds, and a bill was filed against the defendants to compel them to assign the policy to Mr. Briggs. It was proved, that by the rules of the Equitable Insurance Office, notice was not necessary in order to give effect or validity to assignments of policies; and that although notice was sometimes given of the assignment, yet that no registers of such notices were kept. But it was held, that as no notice was given of the assignment, it was not taken out of the order and disposition of the assignor; that if the society did not take notice of assignments, it takes all the risk of such conduct upon itself, and the plaintiffs were declared entitled to the benefit of the policy of insurance. (a)

It should also be seen that the person who insures had an interest in the life insured, and that it continued up to the time of the sale, as if he have no interest, the policy will be void. (b) A bona fide cre

(a) Williams v. Thorp, 2 Sim. 257; and see ex parte Morris, 1 Buck. B.

C. 300.

(b) 14 Geo. III. c. 48. s. 1.