"In  such  a  case,  if  the  vendor  is  unpaid,  one  of  two  innocent
parties  must  suffer  by  the  act  of  a  third ;  and  it  is  reasonable  that
he  who,  by  misplaced  confidence,  has  enabled  such  third  person
to  occasion  the  loss,   should   sustain  it"(«).      The  rule    is  an

(/)  2  T.  E.  p.  680.  middleman  to  carry  the  goods  from  the

(g)   See  also  per  Lord  Alvanley  in  unpaid  vendor,  Turing,  to  Freeman,  his

Oppenheim  v.  EusaeU,  3  B.  &  P.  42,  vendee,  hut  holding  them  as  agent  for

p.  49 ;  decided  in  1802.  ■  Lickbarrow.     It  was  held,  first,  in  Ee

(A)  1  H.  Bl.  at  p.  363.  Westzinthus  (5  B.  &  Ad.  817),  and  then

(i)  Trom  the  judgment  of  the  Privy  in  Spalding  v:  Ending  (6  Beav.  381),

Council  in  Eodger  v.  Comptoir  d'Es-  that  where  the  transitus  was  thus  put

oompte  de  Paris,  L.  E.,  2  P.  C.  p.  406,  an  end  to  by  what  was  in  reality  only  a

citing    Lickbarrow    v.    Mason.      Lord  pledge,   the  stoppage  might  be  made

Blackburn,  in   SeweU   v.  Burdick  (10  available  in  equity  so  far  as  the  rights

A.   C.   74,  pp.   100,   101),  expressed  a  of  the  pledgee  did  not  extend.  I  thought,

different  view  of  the  point  decided  in  and  still  think,  that  the  reason  why  the

Lickbarrow  v.  Mason,  and  of  the  grounds  stoppage  could  not  be  made  available  at

of  the  decision.    He  said: — "The  point  law  was  because  the  shipowner  no  longer

which  I  understand  to  have  been  decided  held  the  goods  as  a  middleman  ;  as  the

in  Lickbarrow  v.  Mason  (5  T.  E.  683)  transferee  of  the  biU  of  lading  for  valu-

was,  that  on  the  transfer  of  the  bill  of  able  consideration,  and  lon&fide  so  as  to

lading  to  Lickbarrow  the  goods  ceased  give  him  a  security,  whether  by  way  of

to  be  in  transitu,  the  shipowner  from  mortgage  or  by  way  of  pledge,  had  »

that  time  no  longer  holding  them  as  a  legal  property  in  the  goods  which  he


632  THE  DELIVERY.
