ADAMS V. MBROHANTS' NAT. BANK. lYT �There îs nothing to show that the money advanced by the bank to the bankrupts wae specifically appropriated in the purchaseof the apples eovered by the receipts; but theyseem to have been paid for as other purchases were, by checks on the bank, drawn on the general account of the bankrupts. Independant of the fact that there is no evidence to show any other receipt issued by the bankrupts, as warehousemen. for property deposited in their warehouse, and of the fact claimed, that these were receipts, given by them, of their own property in the warehouse, substantially to themselves, (the son of one of the bankrupts being merely a nominal party, in whose name the receipts were issued, and who indorsed them to the bank,) the receipts can hardly be con- sidered as valid under the statute. They are as follows : "Eeceived of Cortland Van Camp, subject to his order, and deliverable on retum of this receipt, 150 bairrels of apples, for storage in fruit house." Signed by the bankrupts, and indorsed by Cortland Van Camp. The other receipts are similar. �Now, the statute of the state in relation to warehouses of clasB "B," provides for property stored therein "for a consider- ation," which can hardly be said to be true of the property in this case, as it belonged to the bankrupts themselves, by whom the receipts were issued. And the law also declares that ail warehouse receipts for property stored in warehouses of clasB "B" should distinctly state on their face the brand or distinguishing mark of the property, which these receipts did not state, and so were not within the terms of the statute. I think, therefore, under ail the circumstances oE the case, they cannot be considered to corne within the meaning of the spe- cial statute in relation to warehouses of class "B." Indeed, that is hardly claimed by counsel; and so the case must turn upon ihe general law upon the subject. �If this had been a sale of the property to the bank, and these ^receipts had been given upon the sale, there would, per- haps, not be so much difificulty about the case. Biit that is not clainiedby the bank, and it is clear' from the facts that �v.2,no.2— 12 ����
