Story Case

John Bryson, broom manufacturer, at Canton, Illinois, called Friday at the farm of Jeremiah Hawkins, and purchased the entire standing crop of broom-corn from the latter. Before he left, he gave Hawkins his check for $2,000, in full payment, and made arrangements to return, cut the corn, and convey it to his factory as soon as the crop should have matured. On Saturday morning, when Mr. Hawkins presented the check for $2,000 at his bank, he was told that Mr. Bryson refused to accept the corn crop, and the bank had received orders not to cash the check when presented. Mr. Hawkins remonstrated with the bank, but the transaction was obviously between himself and Mr. Bryson. Whereupon, Hawkins wrote Bryson a letter, informing him that the broom-crop was being held at his risk. Before any action was taken by Mr. Bryson, a summer freshet and flood destroyed the broom-corn. Mr. Hawkins at once brought suit against the broom manufacturer for $2,000, alleging that the corn belonged to him. Will the court decide in his favor?

Ruling Court Case. Thompson Vs. Wilhite, Volume 89 Illinois Reports, Page 356

One Brown, owed Thompson a large amount of money. Since the debtor was not able to settle in cash, he sold to Thompson his crops of wheat and corn, which were not ready for harvest. Subsequently, the wheat and corn were harvested, but before Thompson had time or the opportunity to convey the grain to his home, it was seized by Wilhite, as the property of Brown. This was an action by Thompson to recover the property from Wilhite. It was contended by Wilhite that there had been no delivery, which is necessary as against subsequent purchasers and attaching creditors without notice.

Mr. Chief Justice Scott said: "Any absolute sale of personal property which is of such a nature as to be capable of being removed, is fraudulent in law as to creditors and subsequent purchasers, unless there be a delivery. But when the property is of such a nature that it cannot be delivered, as in this case, such a sale is not fraudulent. In this case, Thompson took all the possession of the wheat and corn possible, sufficient to make a constructive delivery, so the sale is valid against every one." Judgment was given for Thompson.

Ruling Law. Story Case Answer

A sale, unaccompanied by delivery, is fraudulent as against subsequent purchasers without notice, and attaching creditors. Thus, if "A" sells his horse to "B", but retains possession of the animal, and then sells it to "C", who pays a fair value, and does not know of the transaction with "B", "C" retains title and ownership in the horse. However, some personal property, because of its nature, is incapable of actual delivery. In such cases, if the buyer assumes possession of and control over the subject matter, this is sufficient and is known as constructive delivery. Also, constructive delivery may be by delivery of a document of title; as, for example, a bill of lading, warehouse receipt or dock warrant. The delivery of such an instrument protects the purchaser.

The crop of corn, in the Story Case, when sold to Mr. Bryson, was still standing in the field awaiting maturity, hence it was not in a deliverable condition. Nevertheless, since Mr. Bryson was to carry on all the work connected with the harvest and delivery of the broom-corn, he took possession so far as was possible, and title was vested in him. He must, therefore, suffer the loss of its destruction.