BAILMENT.

A bailment on trust implies that
there is reserved to the Bailor the
right to claim a re-delivery of the
property deposited in bailment.
Wherever there is a delivery of
property on a contract for an
equivalent in money, or some
other valuable commodity, and
not for the return of the identical
subject-matter in its original or
an altered form, this is a transfer
of property for value-it is a sale
and not a bailment.
Where, therefore, Corn was depo-

sited by Farmers with a Miller,
to be stored and used as part of
the current consumable stock or
capital of the Miller's trade, and
was by him mixed with other
Corn deposited for the like pur-
pose, subject to the right of the
Farmers to claim at any time an
equal quantity of Corn of the like.
quality, without reference to any
specific bulk from which it was to
be taken, or in lieu thereof the
market price of any equal quantity,
on the day on which he made his
demand, with a small charge for
general purposes:

Held, that such a transaction

amounted to a sale by the Farmer
to the Miller, and was not a
bailment of the Corn, and entitled
the Miller to claim in respect
thereof upon a Policy of Insur-
ance against fire as for his own
property, notwithstanding that
such Corn was not specifically
insured, or described as required

1. The extent of the authority con-
ferred on the Master of a Vessel
to bind the Owners either of the
Ship or cargo, is derived from, and
governed by, the law of the Flag;
and the existence of the necessity
which the Maritime Law requires
to validate the hypothecation of
the Ship and cargo by bottomry,
is to be ascertained by evidence
in the usual manner. The mean-
ing of the term "necessity," in
respect of hypothecation by the
Master, being analogous to its
meaning in other parts of the
law. The Master of a Vessel,
chartered from Galveston, U.S., to
Liverpool, received before sailing
from the Charterer various sums
in part payment of the freight,
and after taking on board a cargo,
sailed for the port of destination.
The Vessel, having in the prose-
cution of her voyage met with bad
weather, and suffered damage,
put into Bermuda, where the Mas-
ter incurred heavy expenses for
repairs and supplies. The repairs
were executed, and the supplies
furnished, without any promise
of a Bottomry Bond; but the law
of Bermuda giving a right of
arrest of the Ship to the Creditors

for the repairs and supplies, the Master to complete the voyage, having written to the Agent of the owners of the Ship, and of the cargo, and not receiving any answer within the time an answer might have been returned, raised the funds necessary for the payment of such supplies on bottomry of the Ship, cargo, and freight. On a suit, brought by the Assignees of the Bond, the owners of the Ship not opposing, the Court below pronounced for the validity of the Bond, so far as it regarded the Ship, cargo, and freight, and the Ship was thereupon sold, but produced a sum far less than sufficient to cover the sum due on the Bond. The Consignees of the cargo, who were also entitled to the freight, claimed to retain in their hands the amount of freight, with interest and insurance, advanced by them in part payment before the commencement of the voyage, and paid the freight, short of that amount, into Court. The Court below disallowed this abatement, and ordered the whole freight to be paid into Court:

Ield, by the Judicial Committee

(1) that, in the circumstances, the Master was warranted in resorting to a Bottomry Bond, and that the necessity of the case warranted the hypothecation of the cargo as well as the Ship and freight, but, (2) as the latter was, by the agreement between the Charterer and the Master, in

part paid in advance, the retention of the amount of such prepayment by the Consignees of the cargo, upheld, as the Master by hypothecating the chartered freight could give no right to more freight than the owner had a right to demand from the Charterer. [The Karnak]

136 2. The Master of a Ship, to raise money for necessary repairs, hypothecated the Ship and freight. The Bottomry Bond contained a clause which provided, that the obligation should be void if the Obligors should pay, in consequence of the loss of the Ship, such an average as by custom would have become due on the salvage, or if the Ship should be utterly lost, cast away, or destroyed, in consequence of the perils. of the sea. The Ship, on her homeward voyage, met with such bad weather as to be obliged to put into an intermediate port in a damaged state, and after being surveyed was found unseaworthy, and sold while existing in specie for a sum less than the amount of the Bond:

Held, by the Judicial Committee (affirming the judgment of the Admiralty Court): First, that the doctrine of constructive total loss does not apply to Bottomry Bonds, as in the case of Insurance between Insurers and Insured, and the Bondholder's claim to the entire proceeds of the sale upheld. Secondly, that the above clause in the Bond did

not apply when the Ship remained in specie, though so much damaged that it would have cost more to repair her than she was worth. [The Great Pacific] - - - 151 3. Before resorting to Bottomry for raising necessary supplies, it is absolutely necessary (where practical) that notice should be given by the Master to the Owner of the Vessel, and an allegation that such owner was Insolvent is no excuse for not communicating to him, unless he has been judicially declared Insolvent, and the ownership of the Vessel vested in his Assignees, to whom such notice must then be given. Semble-Notice to the Mortgagee of the Vessel in such circumstances, would not suffice. [The Panama] 484

CAPE OF GOOD HOPE, LAW O F.

See" COLONIAL LAW," 5.

CHURCH DISCIPLINE ACT. (3rd & 4th Vict. c. 86.) Duty of Judge of the Arches Court to accept Letters of Request. [Sheppard v. Phillimore] - - 58

CIVIL CODE OF LOWER CANADA.

Construction of tit. "Obligations." S.V. Nos. 1187-8. [Ryland v. Delisle] 225

See" COLONIAL LAW," 3.

COLLISION.

See "COMPULSORY PILOTAGE." "SHIP AND SHIPPING."

COLONIAL BISHOPRIC. In 1847, the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope, with its dependencies, was erected into a Bishop's See and Diocese, to be called the "Bishopric of Cape Town," and the Appellant was appointed and consecrated Bishop thereof. By the Letters Patent the Bishop was constituted a body corporate, with power to hold and enjoy land and hereditaments of what nature or kind soever; and he was further empowered to resign the office of Bishop of Cape Town, without prejudice to any responsibility to which he might be liable, in law or equity, in respect of his conduct in his office. In 1850, a grant was made, in the name and on behalf of Her Majesty, of a piece of land in the Town of Pietermaritzbury and District of Natal, in the