OONNBOTIO0T MUT. LIFE INS. CO. ». 8CAMM0H. 273 �insured. But it is to be borne in mind tfaat the interests of ail the mortgagors in the mortgaged property, in common and without severance, was pledged for payment of the debt. Further, that the mortgage covenanted generally for insur- ance, and that it did not specify the several interests of the covenantors. The building was part of the realty, and the interests were undivided. They were dealt with as a unit. The obligation was not in terms that each mortgagor should cause his and her interest to be severally insured for the bene- fit of the mortgagee. Further, as before indicated, it was the legal duty of the defendant Scammon, as the life tenant re- ceiving the rents and profits, to keep the building, as an entirety, insured, and in prOcuring insurance he must be held the agent of his daughters so far as their interests were in- Tolved. And when we consider the terma of the policy of insurance, as it is right to do, in connection with the cove- nants and stipulations in the mortgage, and the relations at the time of ail the parties to each other, the conclusion must be, I think, that this insurance was obtained in pursuance of the requirements of the mortgage, and under the circum- stances the presumption is that it covered what the mortgage specified, namely, the fair insurable value of the building, as an entirety, and in which were united the undivided interests of ail the mortgagors. �The view thus taken is strongly confirmed by the manner in which the insurance proceeds were dealt with by complain- ant. The loss was payable by the terms of the policy to the mortgagee. The draft of the fire insurance company was payable to the mortgagee's order, It was evidently received and treated as a fund to be either applied on the debt or to be used in restoring the original seourity. The acts of com- plainant were equivalent to a collection of the insurance, for it had the draft in hand, indorsed it to Mr. Scammon by ordinary commercial indorsement, and assumed tocontrol the ultimate destiny and use of the proceeds. If the money was to be relinquished and not to be applied on the mortgage debt, it is cleartiiat complainant understood that the legal rights of the parties required that it be placed baok on the mortgaged �v.4,no.4 — 18 ����
