Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/567

 GBBENLBAF V. DOWS. 553 �quite different in form and substance fronl those lield by complain- ants. The form of the certiucates under which respondents claim is set forth in the statement above, They are known as "sur- render certifieates," and they set forth that the parties named therein have "surrendered elevator tickets" for a certain quantity of wheat "free on the track." Harris was in the habit of buying and selling wheat, in addition to the business of receiving wheat for storage and shipment, and it appears that "surrender certifieates" were issued to persons to whom he made sales of wheat in the elevator. At all events, such certifieates were execiited to represent the wheat sold to respondents or their assignors. �There is no doubt that the proof shows a sufficient sale of wheat by Harris to respondents, provided the wheat so sold was the prop- erty of Harris. The question here is whether these surrender certi- fieates are competent evidence of title to grain in the warehouse as against third parties ; or, in other words, are they the evidence of title to grain deposited with a warehouseman which is recognized by the statute of Minnesota above quoted? The statute describes with clearness and accuracy the instrument which shall be prima fade evi- dence of title to such grain. It must be issued and delivered to the person storing the grain, and must state the amount, kind, and grade of the grain stored, the terms of storage, etc. It is olear under this statute that the receipt, to be evidence of title, must be issued by the warehouseman to an actual depositor of grain. It applies only to the receipt or ticket which is issued when the grain is deposited in the warehouse or elevator. The depositor retains the title to a like quantity and grade. The statute contemplates the mixing of the grain of different depositors, and therefore does not provide for the return of the identical grain deposited. The warehouseman bas no power to issue certifieates or receipts to persons who make no deposit of wheat, and to make such certifieates or receipts a lien on wheat actually deposited by others and for which other receipts have been given. The assignee of a deposit receipt or wheat ticket has the assignor's title to the wheat, but the surrender certifieates held by respondents are not assignments of wheat tickets or receipts. They are instruments unknown to the statute. They state that certain holders of elevator tickets have surrendered them, and that they rep- resent a given number of bushels of wheat "free on the track" for shipment, etc. It does not appear from sueh a paper that any wheat remains stored in the warehouse or elevator; much less that the ��� �