Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/562

 550 ,;. , F^Dja^AIi.; BjBPpBTEB. ; :, �controversyf, ,([f; the f^^thoritjeajpitcd, oriany of theip,, jestab- Ush a ciontraffy d,P|C]trjjQe it- bas escaiped JOiie.,. In Ilpjn.ans ,v,. ^<|wtoK,,4rJB]^p. Ebb. §85, cite^^.by t^ieleamed counsel qpon another poinj^, Judge Lowell s^ys-.; . i �, ," Itias, }ioW«ver,'])6eu iield thatiOuewhobiiyB chattels in Massachusetts of ft^ Tendor, whose own tU^c h co^tditioMJ, takes only what thp law of Massachusetts w9uld give him, eyen if at tpe place whare the conditioiial sale wasmade'the 'laW'would have iitiiieid the title'of an innocent pur- ohaserj fiwcAartt v> Camwej!, 98 Massj 149." :i .r ' �In Rogers' Locomotive Works v. Lewis, i Dill. 158, theocfurt assumes that thle ^Missonfi law governed the question of whether dr not the locomotives wero Habie to seizure uuder an exemption dgaiiiist' tfie railroad cortipany, although the contract, which Vyaa very like this one, showed the locomo- tives were delivered in New Jersey. The supreme court has «ettled "tliat question; and it is not, -we thihk, opdn for discus- sion. Green y. Van Buskirk, 5 Wall. 810; Hervey \. B, l. Locomotive Works, 93 U. S. 664. �The'Kentucky statute is in these words: �" No deed of trust or mortgage co^veyrng a legal or equitable title to real or personal estate, shall be valid against a purchaser for a valuable consideration without notice thereof, or against creditois, until such deed shall be acknowledged or proven aecording to law and lodged for record." Qen. St. i 10, e. 24, p. 256. �It isconceded there are many decidions in which the courts decide that conditional salea are not within either the letter or spirit of registration acts like this one. We shall not at- tempt to review the decisions, but confine ourselves to a brief consideration of those of the Kentucky courts and the supreme court of the United States, The earlier Kentucky decisions decided that conditional sales were not within the registration aot. Baylor v. Smither's Heirs, 1 Littell, 113; Patton v. Mc- Cane, 15 B. Mon. 5$5. But the.later decisions are to the effect that agreeme^ts which are usually called conditional sales are within the fict, :and that any agreement which has for its object the securing of a lien for the purchase money, whatever,. may be; the language^ used, is also within the act j:e|uiring registration. In Vaughqn y. Hopson, 10 Bush, 338j ��� �