A different question arises where a bond is given in compliance with a statute which names the obligee and prescribes who may sue thereon. Under statutes allowing suit by the party aggrieved, such party may sue in his own name, without reference to the obligee.1 Thus where the bond is made payable to the state, the county may sue on a bond for the release of personalty seized for taxes,2 or on the bond of a defaulting tax-collector,3 since the county is in the first instance liable for the collection of taxes. So the beneficiaries of insurance policies may sue on a bond given by the insurer to the state,4 or the United States may sue on a sheriff's bond for the escape of a Federal Prisoner.5 Any person injured by breach of a liquor-dealer's bond, payable to the state, may sue thereon.8 So claimants of property attached may sue on an indemnity bond given to the sheriff.7 Persons to whom an examination and inspection of ballots is referred on an election contest may sue on contestant's bond ;8 an assignee in' insolvency may sue in his official capacity on a bond given by the debtors on appeal from a decision adjudging them insolvent ;9 officers entitled to costs may sue on a supersedeas bond given to the adversary party, conditioned to pay to him the " value of the use and occupation of the property " in litigation; and " to pay all costs " ;10 and a judgment creditor may sue in his own name on a supersedeas bond made payable by mistake to the clerk.11 If an officer whose duty it is to collect taxes by making a levy on personalty in the first instance, does not do so, and thereby causes the tax to be collected out of realty, to the damage of a mortgagee thereof, such mortgagee has been allowed to maintain an action on the bond of such officer.12

7 In Wisconsin a promise to turn over a building to the city free of all claims and to give receipts for claims against such building does not enure to the benefit of a party who furnishes material. Electric Appliance Co. v. Guaranty Co., 110 Wis. 434; 53 L. R. A. 609; 85 N. W. 648. This rule applies where the owner is not to pay the contractor until he is satisfied that there are no mechanics' liens on the building. Campbell v. Carnagie, 98 Wis. 99; 73 N. W. 572. To the same effect see Holly Mfg. Co. v. Water Co., 48 Fed. 879; Parker v. Jeffrey, 26 Or. 186; 37 Pac. 712; Montgomery v. Rief, 15 Utah 495; 50 Pac. 623.

8 Washburn v. Investment Co., 26 Or. 436; 36 Pac. 533; 38 Pac. 620; Parker v. Jeffrey, 26 Or. 186; 37 Pac. 712.

9 Jefferson v. Asch, 53 Minn. 446; 39 Am. St. Rep. 618; 25 L. R. A. 257; 55 N. W. 604. See Sec. 1311.

1 Washington Corporation v. Young, 10 Wheat. (U. S.) 406; Union Guaranty and Trust Co. v. Robinson, 79 Fed. 420; Williams v. Simons, 70 Fed. 40; 16 C. C. A. 628; Hubert v. Mendheim, 64 Cal. 213; 30 Pac. 633; Morton v. Power, 33 Minn. 521; 24 N. W. 194; St. Paul v. Butler, 30 Minn. 459; 16 N. W. 362; Hume v. Kelly, 28 Or. 398; 43 Pac. 380; Crook County v. Bush-nell, 15 Or. 169; 13 Pac. 886; Governor v. Allen, 8 Humph. (Tenn.) 176; 47 Am. Dec. 601.

2 Curry v. Gila County, - Ariz. -; 53 Pac. 4; citing Mendocino County v. Lamar, 30 Cal. 628; Sacramento County Supers, v. Bird, 31 Cal. 67; Mendocino County v. Morris, 32 Cal. 145.

3 Hume v. Kelly, 28 Or. 398; 43 Pac. 380.

4 Union Guaranty and Trust Co. v. Robinson, 79 Fed. 420.