outstanding. The court may also in its discretion order the payment of the warehouseman's reasonable costs and counsel fees.

The delivery of the goods under an order of the court as provided in this section, shall not relieve the warehouseman from liability to a person to whom the negotiable receipt has been or shall be negotiated for value without notice of the proceedings or of the delivery of the goods.

Section 15. A receipt upon the face of which the word "duplicate" is plainly placed is a representation and warranty by the warehouseman that such receipt is an accurate copy of an original receipt properly issued and uncancelled at the date of the issue of the duplicate, but shall impose upon him no other liability.

Section 16. No title or right to the possession of the goods, on the part of the warehouseman, unless such title or right is derived directly or indirectly from a transfer made by the depositor at the time of or subsequent to the deposit for storage, or from the warehouseman's lien, shall excuse the warehouseman from liability for refusing to deliver the goods according to the terms of the receipt.

Section 17. If more than one person claims the title or possession of the goods, the warehouseman may either as a defense to an action brought against him for non-delivery of the goods, or as an original suit, whichever is appropriate, require all known claimants to interplead.

New Jersey.-N. J. L. G. & T. Co. V. Rector (1909), 75 N. J. E. 423, 72 Atl. 968.

New York.-Manhattan Storage

& Warehouse Co. v. Benguiat Art Museum (1913), 139 N. Y. Supp. 1073, 155 App. Div. 196.

Section 18. If some one other than the depositor or person claiming under him has a claim to the title or possession of the

goods, and the warehouseman has information of such claim, the warehouseman shall be excused from liability for refusing to deliver the goods, either to the depositor or person claiming under him or to the adverse claimant, until the warehouseman has had a reasonable time to ascertain the validity of the adverse claim or to bring legal proceedings to compel all claimants to interplead.

Massachusetts.- Cushman v. Boston Storage Warehouse Co. (1911), 207 Mass. 407.

New Jersey.-N. J. L. G. & T. Co.

v. Rector (1909), 75 N. J. Eq. 423, 72 Atl. 968.

New York.— Zaber V. Mehrle (1908), 112 N. Y. Supp. 1093.

Section 19. Except as provided in the two preceding sections and in sections 9 and 36, no right or title of a third person shall be a defense to an action brought by the depositor or person claiming under him against the warehouseman for failure to deliver the goods according to the terms of the receipt.

Section 20. A warehouseman shall be liable to the holder of a receipt for damages caused by the non-existence of the goods or by the failure of the goods to correspond with the description thereof in the receipt at the time of its issue. If, however, the goods are described in a receipt merely by a statement of marks or labels upon them, or upon packages containing them, or by a statement that the goods are said to be goods of a certain kind, or that the packages containing the goods are said to contain goods of a certain kind, or by words of like purport, such statements, if true, shall not make liable the warehouseman issuing the receipt, although the goods are not of the kind which the marks or labels upon them indicate, or of the kind they were said to be by the depositor.

Alabama.

Kitchens V. Mann New Jersey.-Stewart v. Kilmer (1913), 88 Atl. 1051.

(1918), Ala. App. 80 So. 173.

Section 21. A warehouseman shall be liable for any loss or injury to the goods caused by his failure to exercise such care

in regard to them as a reasonably careful owner of similar goods would exercise, but he shall not be liable, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, for any loss or injury to the goods which could not have been avoided by the exercise of such

Section 22. Except as provided in the following section, a warehouseman shall keep the goods so far separate from goods of other depositors, and from other goods of the same depositor for which a separate receipt has been issued, as to permit at all times the identification and re-delivery of the goods deposited.

Section 23. If authorized by agreement or by custom, a warehouseman may mingle fungible goods with other goods of

the same kind and grade. In such case the various depositors of the mingled goods shall own the entire mass in common and each depositor shall be entitled to such portion thereof as the amount deposited by him bears to the whole.

North Dakota.- Street v. Farmer's El. Co. of Elkton (1914), 146 N. W. 1077.

South Dakota.- Natl. Bk. of Wheaton, Minn. v. Elkins, Sheriff et al (1916), 159 N. W. 60.

United States.- Interstate Banking & Trust Co. v. Brown (1916), 225 Fed. 32.

Section 24. The warehouseman shall be severally liable to each depositor for the care and re-delivery of his share of such mass to the same extent and under the same circumstances as if the goods had been kept separate.

Illinois. Hobbs V. Monarch Refrig. Co. (1917), 277 Ill. 326, 115 N. E. 534.

Louisiana. Jennings-Heywood Oil Syn. v. Koussiere Oil Co. (1910), 127 La. 971, 54 So. 318.

Washington.-Union El. & Warehouse Co. v. Farmers Warehouse Co. (1912), 69 Wash. 664, 125 Pac. 960.

Section 25. If goods are delivered to a warehouseman by the owner or by a person whose act in conveying the title to them to a purchaser in good faith for value would bind the owner, and a negotiable receipt is issued for them, they can not thereafter, while in the possession of the warehouseman, be attached by garnishment or otherwise, or be leviel upon under an execution, unless the receipt be first surrendered to the warehouseman, or its negotiation enjoined. The warehouseman shall in no case be compelled to deliver up the actual possession of the goods until the receipt is surrendered to him or impounded by the court.