Where statutes provide that a mortgage of chattels shall be void unless the mort gage is Sled or there shall be an actual and continued change of possession, it is essen tial that such provisions be strictly complied with ; Buckstaff Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Snyder, 54 Neb. 538, 74 N. W. 863; McTaggart v. Rose, 14 Ind. 230. See Mower v. McCarthy, 79 Vt. 142, 64 AU. 578, 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 418, 118 Am. St. Rep. 942.
The removal of the mortgaged chattels from the county where the mortgage on them was recorded does not require it to be recorded in the new place; Jones, Chatt. Mortg. § 260; National Bank of Commerce v. Jones, 18 Okl. 555, 91 Pac. 191, 12 L. R. A. (N. S.) 311, 11 Ann. Cas. 1041.
.Statutes regulating chattel mortgages ex ist in all of the states except Louisiana.
Under the old Bankrupt. Act it was held that a bankrupt assignee took only the debtor's title to goods in the case of an unrecorded mortgage; Stewart v. Platt, 101 U. S. 731, 25 L. Ed. 816 ; and so in England; 12 M. & W. 855. The rule was generally otherwise in insolvency ; Jones, Chatt. Mortg. § 242. The present Bankrupt Act (§ 67 a) provides that liens which are invalid against creditors shall be invalid against the trustee. See Knapp v. Trust Co., 216 U. S. 545, 30 Sup. Ct. 412, 54 L. Ed. 610. It leaves open to
the individual states to allow the acquisition of a lien by the mortgagee by taking posses sion at any time before actual bankruptcy, and it is immaterial that possession is taken with the mortgagor's consent; Humphrey v. Tatman, 198 U. S. 91, 25 Sup. Ct. 567, 49 L. Ed. 956; Thompson v. Fairbanks, 196 U. S. 516, 25 Sup. Ct. 306, 49 L. Ed. 577.
A chattel mortgage void by a state stat ute as to creditors of the mortgagor, for want of change of possession, is invalid as to his trustees in bankruptcy.
A chattel mortgage with power of sale and a deed of trust are practically one and the same instrument, as understood in the District of Columbia ; Hunt v. Ins. Co., 196 U. S. 47, 25 Sup. Ct. 179, 49 L. Ed. 381.
No mortgage of a vessel is valid against third parties without notice, unless recorded in the office of the collector of customs of the port where the vessel is enrolled; Rev. Stat. § 4192, etc. As between parties and those who have notice, registration is not required; Moore v. Simonds, 100 U. S. 145, 25 L. Ed. 590; Best v. Staple, 61 N. Y. 71; The John T. Moore, 3 Wood 61, Fed. Cas. No. 7,430. As to Extraterritoriality of Chat tel Mortgages, see CONFLICT OF LAWS.
See MORTGAGE.