OOHNEOTIOUT ' ItTC. '-tàM ie^ai' *6. ». BOAMMOK. '■ 069 �Scamlnon, according to the evidence, Vere nôt " «ebûSdlted about the disposition of the insurance money, and, so far as is shown, had no knowledge 6f and gave no consent to its payment to their father, or to îts deposit in the.bank; nor bave they ever asserted any rights in relation thereto until the commencement of this suit. �Upon the case stated it is insisted by the defendants, TTho contest complainant's right to a decree, that the insurance money in question -was in legal effect collected by complain- ant, and, in fact, came to its hands; that complainant had no authority to surrender the same to the defendant J. Y. Scammon ; that its receipt by complainant constituted satis- faction _pro tanto of the mortgage; that the covenant in the mortgage for insurance operated as an assignment of the insurance fund, when collected, to the mortgagee; and that it could not, under any arrangement made with J'. Y. Scam- mon, without their consent, be legally paid back tô hiîn and the mortgage be still kept in force, to their prejudice, and as a continuing ûr renetved ehcutabràncie ùpon their intere'st. On the bther hand, it is contended that the defendant J. Y. Scammon had an insuraMe iiiterest in the niortgaged' f rem- ises; that ail of the niortgagora agreed in their mortgage 'to furnish insurance to the fù'll' value 6f their insurable interestg ; that the two defendants who make defence procured no insur- ance on the property or thôir interest therein ; that the poiioy of insurance run to J. Y. Scànïmon alône, and, therefore, that he could reeover upon the poiioy no matter what his intërest in the property was; that hie daughters had no interest iSa the proceeds of the insurance; that the policy was held by complainant as collateral seourity; that it could elect, if it chose, not to collect the insurance, and, if collected, it' could rightfuUy pay the money back to the party insured; that the daughters had no interest or concern in the transaction, and that the insurance which was obtained only in legal effect covered the interest of J. Y. Scammon in the property. �In reply it is urged that the insurance was procured as additional security to the mortgage ; that, though it was taken in Ûie individual name of J. Y. Scammon, itwas furnished ����
