DOUGLASS V. VOGELER, 5,9 �of the reported decision is as follows: "This court holds that although the chattel mortgages were void as against creditors because they were not filed in the proper place, they were valid as between the mortgagor andmortgagecs without being filed, and that part of the proceeds of sale of the mort- gage property which remained after liens of judgment cred- itors were discharged belonged not to the assignee in bank- ruptcy for purposes of his, but to the mortgagees." �This doctrine was recognized by the circuit judge of this circuit and applied in the case of Cushing t. Horton at the present term. The doctrine of these cases is conclusive upon this question. This mortgagG, although unrecorded, was a valid lien against Otto Taxis, the bankrupt, and must be so held as against his assignee, and was, therefore, to the extent of the balance due thereon, a valid consideration for the new mortgage. But, if it were not so, the amount of liability assumed by Vogeler as consideration for the new mortgage ■was greater than the amount for which the property sold. The views expressed in regard to the validity of mortgages for present advances render it unnecessary to examine the question as to the insolvenoy of Otto Taxis at the time of the execution of the mortgages, or as to the knowledge of or cause for belief of his insolvenoy possessed by Vogeler, the mort- gagee; thus leaving for determination the only remaining question, whether the parties in the execution and receipt of these mortgages acted in good faith or for a fraudulent pur- pose. From the evidence I am satisfied that the parties in the execution of both the mortgages acted in good faith, and not for any fraudulent purpose? or design. �The bill will, therefore, be dismissed, and the assignee ordered to pay to the defendant the proceeds of the sale of the mortgage property after payment of costs. ��� �
