REPOSITORIES AND AUCTIONS. 41 



looking at this case, there is a clear dealing with the pro- 

 perty and exercising dominion over the chattel, and a 

 delivery of it by the defendant to another person to do 

 what he likes with it." 



But where the plaintiffs were the holders of a Bill of Selling' 

 Sale including certain Horses and harness ; and the grantor Worses com- 

 of the Bill of Sale, without the plaintiff's knowledge, took of sale. 

 the Horses and harness to the defendant's Repository for 

 sale by auction and they were entered in the catalogue, 

 the defendant knowing nothing of the Bill of Sale ; but 

 before the auction the grantor of the Bill of Sale sold the 

 Horses and harness by j)rivate contract in the defendant's 

 yard, and the purchase-money was paid to the defendant, 

 who deducted his commission and paid the balance to the 

 seller, the Horses and harness being delivered to the pur- 

 chaser ; it was held that the defendant was not guilty of 

 conversion (o). For the defendant had received the Horses 

 and harness from the grantor of the Bill of Sale, and had 

 delivered them back to the person to whom the grantor of 

 the Bill of Sale had given a delivery order ; he had not 

 claimed to transfer the title, and he had not purported to 

 sell ; all the dominion he exercised over the chattels was to 

 re-deliver them to the man, the person from whom he 

 had received them had told him to re-deliver them {p). 



Where a Horse is sent to a common Bepository, for the Horse sent to 

 sale of Horses, an authority to sell is implied, although no ^ Kei^ositoiy. 

 authority was ever given in fact, and the owner will be 

 bound by a sale to a bond fide purchaser, although made 

 without his express consent [q). 



Where a Horse is sold at a Bepository, the possession Auctioneer's 

 is in the Auctioneer, and it is he who makes the contract, po'^sestsion. 

 If the Horse should be stolen he may maintain an indict- 

 ment, and he has such a special property as to maintain 

 an action against the buyer for Goods sold and deli- 

 vercd{r), but not in a case where the right of a third 

 person intervenes, and is established (-s). But where, as 

 in the north of England, there is a sale by auction of 

 Horses and cattle on the owner's premises, it is doubtful 



(o) National Mercantile Bank v. (r) See Williams v. Milling ton, 1 



Mymill, 44 L. T., N. S. 767— C. A. H. Bla. 85 ; Robinson v. Ruttcr, 24 



Eeversiug Ibid. 307— Lopes, J. L. J., Q. B. 250. See also Bacis v. 



{p) Ibid, per Bramwell, L. J. Artinr/stall, 49 L. J., Cli. G09 ; 42 



{q) See Fickerinf/ v. Busk, 15 L. T., N. S. 507; 29 W. R. 137. 



East, 38, 45; Chit. Contr. lltli («) Dickenson v. Naul, i B. & Ad, 



ed. 195. 638. 



