884 FEDEftAL BePORTEE. �ïndorsed. When the last payment was ruade the eertificate was assigned by Mr. Buchanan. No doiibt' «eetiis to have been entertained by the coal company that Mr. Buchanan was duly authorized to transfer the certificate, and perhaps it was net unreasonable that this conclusion should be reached. Mr. Buchanan has insisted, certainly from the beginning of this litigation, that he had due authority. �Mr. Sharpe seems to be a very fair, well-meaning man, in- tending to do what was right and proper, and yet he was not quite as particular and clear as he ought to have been in dealing with a person like Mr. Buchanan. When first in- formed that Mr. Buchanan had the money, he did not inquire as precisely and definitely into ail the circumstances of the case as he ought to have done. If, for instance, — on his theory of the case, — he had said to Mr. Buchanan, " You had no right to sell this property ;' what you did waS an unauthorized act ;" and he if had then re'^used to treat with Mr. Buchanan on the basis that he was authorized to receive the money ai'isihg from the sale of the property, there would have been no dif&culty about thô case. But he seems not tohavetaken any decided line of conduct, and adhered to it, froîn the first intimation given to him that the money had been reoeived. It is true, he claims that while Mr. Buchanan had told him He had sold the property and got the money, Mr. Buchanan àfterwàrds said the property had beeù redeemed, and that he did not understand distinctly that the certificate of piirchase had been assigned. But it ib clear, I think, from the inter- views which took place between him and Mr. Buchanan, that the main object he had wastoobtain the-oioney. Of course, that was natural. It did not matter to the Insurance com- pany whether Mr. Buchanan had sold the land, or whefcher the decree of foreclosure had been paid or the property re- deemed. They did not wish to make a speculation off the sale. AU they wanted was the money, principal and interest, and it is to be observed that this is not without significance in determining what is the true view to be taken by the court. �It seems to me very clear that when the dispute sprung up between Mr. Sharpe and Mr. Buchanan, as to the amount ����
