STEIGEE V. THIRD NAT. BANI. 573 �as rights of property ? As will be seen hereaf ter the United States supreme court bas determined the true meaning of the tenu employed in this and like statutes. �The act of 1868 (Missouri Statutes) denounces penaltie» against a factor who does not account for or pay over to his principal the amount received on the negotiation, pledge, etc.^ of goods consigned. Does that imply that a negotiation or pledge may be made by the factor for more than his lien, he alone to be answerable for the surplus, and that the pledgee may not be also held for the surplus ? Is not that section intended not to exonerate the indorser or transferee from lia- bility to the consignor, but to add to the consignor's seeurity those penal provisions? The Missouri act, March 4, 1869, repeats the provisions of the act of 1868, supra, as to negotia- bUity, and in section 2 declares that the indorsee of the receipt shall be deemed the owner of the goods, "ao far as to give validity to any pledge, lien," etc., "as on the faith thereof," with the same proviso as in the former act. The repeal of certain sections in the former act does not affect the present inquiry further than is needed to interpret the force and effeot of the terms, "as on the faith thereof." Does the insertion of these words enlarge or restrict the rights of the indorsee ? By the prior statute the simple indorsement caused the indorsee of the receipt to be deemed the owner, so far as to give valid- ity, etc.; but it must have appeared to the legislature that such a provision left the door to fraud wide open, and henoe in the act of 1869 the relationship of the indorsee seeking the benefit of the transfer was confined to a bona fide indorsee ; or, in the languageof the act, to a transfer, pledge, etc., made "on the faith" of the warehouse receipt. Such being the condition of the statutes, the act of March 28, 1874, was passed, evidently designed to punish fraudulent factors and warehousemen, restricting their negogiations and pledges of bUls of lading and warehouse receipts to cases where the owner or consignor gives written autkority therefor; whence the proviso to the act, which is in the following words : "Pro- vided, that nothing herein shall be construed to prevent such consignee or other person lawfuUy possessed of such bill of ��� �
