Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/767

POBTEB V. KINO. 759 �his protection, as it left Gill in possession of the bond and mortgage, and in a position to deal as lawful owner of the same with innocent third persons. Jeffers v. Gill, for vse, 8 W. N. G. 19; Kellogg v. Smith, 26 N. Y. 18. It is said in Jones on Mortgages, (vol. 1, § 476,) that, except under peculiar circumstances, a person acting in good faith would not take a mere written transfer of the mortgage title without a delivery of the mortgage itself, and the note ox bond secured thereby. Now, the actual good faith of Mr. PoUock is not open to ques- tion. But, unfortunately for him, he accepted such an assiga- ment as no ordinarily prudent man would have taken ; and it must be remembered that in bis previous interview with Gill this manifestly was the kind of assignment which Gill pro- posed to mail to PoUock, and which the latter then impliedly agreed to accept. �After receiving his assignment he did absolutely nothing to make it efficient. He took no steps to have it made mat- ter of record, or noted upon the original papers, and he did not even give the mortgagors notice. Had he given season- able notice to Hamilton Lacock, it is highly probable that the double assignment would have been discovered in time to frustrate Gill's fraud and prevent this loss; for Lacock had contemporaneous information from Gill that King had ad- vanced the money on the bond and mortgage. �William G. Eang, as we have seen, found the bond in Gill's hands, and the mortgage, if not in his actual possession, in the recorder's office, under his control, with nothing appear- ing upon either instrument to indicate any prior assignment. On the faith of the securities, without notice or means of knowledge of the assignment to Pollock, he made the purchase in perfect good faith, paying a fuU consideration. He imme- diately took the wise precaution of having the assignment to him put upon the back of the bond. He supposed, and from the receipts which Gill delivered to him he had good right to believe, that a proper assignment of the mortgage had been made on the margin of the record, in the customary way. But without such assignment the title to the mortgage passed to and vested in him ; for it is firmly settled that the debt ��� �