In case of foreclosure of a mortgage, as to whether the heir or personal representative takes the surplus depends upon whether the mortgagor died before or after the foreclo sure; 2 Sim. St. 323 ; although in one case, where foreclosure was before mortgagor's death, still it was held that the surplus went to his heirs ; 124 L. T. 503. ' A conditional di rection to sell land can cause no equitable conversion until the condition is satisfied; L. R. 26 Ch. Div. 601.
When a binding option for the purchase of land is not exercised until after the death of the vendor, the conversion relates back as between the heir and the personal repre sentative to the date of the contract by which the option was given ; 14 Ves. 591; D'Arras v. Keyser, 26 Pa. 249 ; Newport Wa ter-Works v. Sisson, 18 R. I. 411, 28 Atl. 336 ; contra, Smith v. Loewenstein, 50 Ohio 346, 34 N. E. 159.
Courts of equity have power to order the conversion of property held in a trust from real estate into personal estate, or vice versa, when such conversion is not in conflict with the will of the testator, expressly or by im plication, and is for the interest of the cestui que trust; Ex parte Jordan, 4 Del. Ch. 615 ; Johnson v. Payne, 1 Hill (S. C.) 112. The English court of chancery largely exercised this jurisdiction ; 2 Sto. Eq. Jur. § 1357 ; 6 Ves. Jr. 6; 6 Madd. 100.
At Law. An unauthorized assumption and exercise of the right of ownership over goods or personal chattels belonging another, to the alteration of their condition or the exclu sion of the owner's rights.. Stickney v. Mun roe, 44 Me. 197 ; Gilman v. Hill, 36 N. H. 311; Aschermann v. Brewing Co., 45 Wis. 262.
A. constructive conversion takes place when a person does such acts in reference to the goods or personal chattels of another as amount, in view of the law, to appropriation of the property to himself.
A direct con/version takes place when a person actually appropriates the property of another to. his own beneficial use and enjoy ment, or to that of a third person, or destroys it, or alters its nature.
Every such unauthorized taking of per sonal property ; Pollock, Torts 435 ; Kennet v. Robinson, 2 J. J. Mar. (Ky.) 84 ; Hutchin son v. Bobo, 1 Bailey (S. C.) 546 ; Murray v. Burling, 10 Johns. (N. Y.) 172 ; Howitt v. Estelle, 92 Ill. 218 ; and all intermeddling with it beyond the extent of authority con ferred, in case a limited authority over it has been given ; Cummings v. Perham, 1 Mete. (Mass.) 555; Grant v. King, 14 Vt. 367 ; Seymour v. Ives, 46 Conn. 109; People v. Bank, 75 N. Y. 547 ; Liptrot v. Holmes, 1 Ga. 381; with intent so to apply or dispose of it as to alter its condition or interfere with the owner's dominion ; Stevens v. Curtis, 18 Pick. (Mass.) 227 ; 8 M. & W. 540 ; consti tutes a conversion, including a taking by those claiming without right to be assignees I in bankruptcy ; 3 Brod. & B. 2 ; using a thing without license of the owner ; Holland v. Osgood, 8 Vt. 281; Silsbury v. McCoon, 6 Hill (N. Y.) 425, 41 Am. Dec. 753 ; Johnson v. Weedman, 4 Scam. (III.) 495 ; Scruggs v. Davis, 5 Sneed (Tenn.) 261; Johnson's Adm'rs v. The Arabia, 24 Mo. 86 ; or in excess of the license ; Hart v. Skinner, 16 Vt. 138, 42 Am. Dec. 500 ; Wheelock v. Wheelwright, 5 Mass.
104 ; Disbrow v. Ten Broeck, 4 E. D. Sm. (N.
Y.) 397; Creach v. McRae, 50 N. C. 122; nvisuse or detention by a finder or other bailee ; Wheelock v. Wheelwright, 5 Mass. 104 ; Marriam v. Yeager, 2 B. Monr. (Ky.) 339 ; Cargill v. Webb, 10 N. H. 199 ; Ripley v. Dolbier, 18 Me. 382 ; Spencer v. Pilcher, 8 Leigh (Va.) 565; Gentry v. Madden, 3 Ark. 127 ; Horsely v. Branch, 1 Humph. (Tenn.) 199 ; Disbrow v. Ten Broeck, 4 E. D. Sm. (N. Y.) 397 ; Fail v. McArthur, 31 Ala. 26 ; see Harvey v. Epes, 12 Gratt. (Va.) 153 ; de livery by a bailee in violation of orders ; St. John v. O'Connel, 7 Port. (Ala.) 466 ; non delivery by a wharfinger, carrier, or other bailee ; Langford v. Cummings, 4 Ala. 46 ; Judah v. Kemp, 2 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 411; Ewart v. Kerr, Rice (S. C.) 204 ; Greenfield Bank v. Leavitt, 17 Pick. (Mass.) 1, 28 Am. Dec. 268; a wrongful sale by a bailee, under some circumstances ; 10 M. & W. 576 ; 11 id. 363 ; Everett v. Coffin, 6 Wend. (N. y.) 603, 22 Am. Dec. 551; Carraway v. Burbank, 12 N. C. 306 ; Howitt v. Estelle, 92 Ill. 218 ; Bay lis v. Cronkite, 39 Mich. 413 ; a sale of stolen goods by an auctioneer, though made without notice of the lack of title ; [1892] 1 Q. B. 495 ; where one, who has authority to sell, sells below the authorized price, it does not con stitute conversion ; • Sarjeant v. Blunt, 16 Johns. (N. Y.) 74 ; contra, ChAse v. Basker ville, 93 Minn. 402, 101 N. W. 950. It is not conversion to sell for credit, when authorized to sell only for cash ; Loveless v. Fowler, 79 Ga. 134, 4 S. E. 103, 11 Am. St. Rep. 407 ; but exchanging the goods has been held a conversion ; Ainsworth v. Partilro, 13 Ala. 460 ; a failure to sell when ordered ; Barton v. White's Adm'r, 1 Harr. & J. (Md.) 579 ; Ainsworth v. Partin°, 13 Ala. 460 ; improper or informal seizure of goods by an officer ; Sanborn v. Hamilton, 18 Vt. 590; Reynolds v. Shuler, 5 Cow. (N. Y.) 323 ; Burk v. Bax ter, 3 Mo. 207 ; Martin v. England, 5 Yerg. (Tenn.) 313 ; Burgin v. Burgin, 23 N. C. 453; Calkins v. Lockwood, 17 Conn. 154, 42 Am. Dec. 729 ; Fiedler v. Maxwell, 2 Blatchf. 552, Fed. Cas. No. 4,760 ; Ferguson v. Clif ford, 37 N. H. 86 ; informal sale by Such of ficer ; Pierce v. Benjamin, 14 Pick. (Mass.) 356, 25 Am. Dec. 396 ; or appropriation to himself ; Perkins v. Thompson, 3 N. H. 144 ; as against such officer in the last three cases ; the adulteration of liquors as to the whole quantity affected ; 3 A. & E. 306; Young v. Mason, 8 Pick. (Mass.) 551; an excessive levy on a defendant's goods, folloWed by a sale ; 6 Q. B. 381; but not including a mere tres pass with no further intent ; 8 M. & W. 540: Stevens v. Curtis, 18 Pick. (Mass.) 227 ; nor au accidental loss by mere omission of a car rier ; 2 Greenl. Ev. § 643 ; 5 Burr. 2825 ; Dwight v. Brewster, 1 Pick. (Mass.) 50, 11 Am. Dec. 133 ; Hawkins v. Hoffman, 6 Hill (N. Y.) 586, 41 Am. Dec. 767; nor mere non feasance; 2 B. & P. 438; Calrnes v. Bleecker, 12 Johns. (N. Y.) 300. A manual taking Is not necessary.
Troyer will lie for the value of property il legally withheld under an unlawful claim for freight.charges ; Marsh v. R. Co., 9 Fed. 873 ; Richardson v. Rich, 104 Mass. 156, 6 Am. Rep. 210 ; Beasley v. R. Co., 27 App. D.