case Kruger against Wilcox factor gain a lie on good consign to he from his  correspondent for the balance of his account as well as for the duty c and may  retain for such balance but if he part with the possession of the good to the  owner he lose the lie for the balance of account lib Reg a foe a S c dick cite  burr burr burr black Rep see ken hark ms that and that Jan this cause come on  for further direction the case be mico be general agent in England for Watkins  who be a merchant abroad and at different time have receive considerable  consignment of good and upon the balance of account be in disburse afterward  Watkins consign to he a parcel of logwood for which he pay the charge c  Watkins come to England mico say as he be here he may dispose of the good  himself Watkins accord employ a broker to sell they and mico tell the broker  that ambler Watkins intend to sell they himself to save commission and mico  give order to the warehouseman to deliver the good to that broker the broker  sell they and make out bill of parcel to Watkins and open a account with  Watkins but take no notice of mico after the good be sell mico begin to  suspect Watkinss circumstance and resort to the broker to know whether he have  open a account with Watkins the great question in the cause be suppose mico  have a lie on these good and produce so as to be entitle to retain they for  the balance of the account whether he have not part with that right after  argument at the bar Lord chancellor adjourn the cause to the that and desire  the four merchant who be examine in the cause on the different side may attend  in court in order to be consult by he upon the point note as to the notice  which court take of the custom of trade see ekins v Macklish ante and accord  this day they attend videlicet Mr alderman baker and bethell Mr Willetts and  Fonereau and after have ask they several question upon the custom and usage of  merchant relate to the matter in doubt his lordship give his opinion with  great clearness as follow Lord Hardwicke chancellor this be a case of  bankruptcy in which this court always incline to equality yet if any person  have a specific lie or a special property in good which be clear and plain it  shall be reserve to he notwithstanding the bankruptcy question be whether in  this case mico be entitle to a specific lie and consequent a preference in  point of satisfaction out of the money arise by sale of these good two thing  be to be consider saint what lie a factor gain on good consign to he by a  merchant abroad and whether mico gain such lie in this case ambler d if he do  whether he have do any thing to part with it as to saint all the four merchant  both in their examination in the cause and now in court agree that if there be  a course of deal and general account between the merchant and factor and a  balance be due to the factor he may retain the ship and good or produce for  such balance of the general account as well as for the charge custom c pay on  the account of the particular cargo they consider it as a interest in the  specific thing and make they article in the general account whether this be  ever allow in trover at law where the good be turn into money I can say nor  can I find any such case I have no doubt it will be so in this court if the  good remain in specie nor do I doubt of its be so where they be turn into  money to d question I be of opinion mico have part with his right and that it  be for the benefit of trade to say he have all the merchant agree that  although a factor may retain for the balance of a account yet if the merchant  come over and the factor deliver the good up to he by his part with the  possession he part with the specific lie such be the law of the land as to  retainer in other case she v Dawson ms atk question whether this case amount  to the delivery up of the logwood to the principal I think it do mico suffer  Watkins to employ a broker and tell ambler er p the broker that Watkins intend  to sell they himself to save commission mico give order to the warehouseman to  deliver the good to the broker the broker sell they and make out bill of  parcel to Watkins and take no notice of mico it amount to the same thing as if  mico have deliver the good in specie to Watkins it be safe for trade to hold  it in this manner than otherwise for by that manner of act mico give Watkins a  credit with other people for the sale be public and by that the good appear to  be Watkinss which will not have be the case if mico have retain for the  balance of his account ambler it be better to allow that which be the public  notorious transaction than that which be secret suppose a action have be bring  by Watkins against the broker for money have and receive the broker can not  have defend himself by say so much be due to mico the merchant have admit that  the specific lie as to the custom charge c do continue even the law will have  allow it if the good have remain in specie the good be sell make the case  strong but that be not now before I be determine by his late honour the master  of the roll and acquiesce in by the party before this case it be certain  doubtful whether a factor have a lie and can retain for the balance of his  general account per Lord Mansfield in green v farmer a burr see in Godin v  London assurance company burr S c black Rep gardener v Coleman cite burr  Foxcroft v Devonshire burr Houghton v Jackson b p walker v buck t r so if a  factor have a lie ship the good to the principal he can after stop they in  passage sweet v Pyne east and where good be consign to a factor for sale he  have no lie on they until they come into his actual possession Kinlock v craip  r where a factor have sell the good if he be in advance on they by actual  payment or have sell on a deal to give as a loan commission he have a lie on  the price though he be part with the possession of the good per Chamber in  Houghton v matthews b p see Scrimshire v alderstone stram so also where he  have become surety for the principal on faith of the good be consign to he  Drinkwater v Goodwin Cowp see Foxcroft v Devonshire burn or be under  acceptance on faith of a ship be consign to he for sale Hammond v Barclay east  where however he have no such special claim on the good it be otherwise per  chamber justice in Houghton v matthews and in such last case the payer will  not be justify in pay the factor after notice from the principal not to do so  bull n p per chief justice lee in Scrimshire v alderstone star escot v Milward  east n p as the lie which a factor have on the good of his principal arise  from a agreement which the law regard the custom imply so where there be a  express stipulation to the contrary it put a end to the general rule of law  thus where the factor promise to pay the proceed to the principal when sell it  be hold that he have no lie on the good unsold for his general balance walker  v birch t r again as the factor right to a lie for a general balance rest on  the custom of trade and it be a general rule that nothing can fall within that  custom but what concern trade so collateral obligation such as money due on  rend for a legacy c as they do not concern trade do not seem to fall within  the rule which authorize a factor to retain for his general balance see in  Houghton v matthews b p see ex part Deeze atk with the remark in that case in  ex part Ockendon ib and in b p and green v farmer burr and a factor have not  it seem a hen for a debt due from the principal before he become his factor  Houghton v matthews b p Christian b l vol second edition for the present law  relate to the deal of agent or factor with the good of their principal as  regard the right of three party to who such good may have be sell pledge or  consign by such agent or factor see stat Geo ch it have be hold that under the  above stat if a hold b s good with a lie on they against b transfer they to c  c can hold they against b to the extent of a s lie unless the transfer be  express make as a pledge Thompson v farmer moody malkin n p Rep upon the  question of stoppage of good in passage see DAguila v Lambert post it appear  from lib Reg that upon the arrival of the ship mico order the log ambler er p  wood to be unload and hire a warehouse to lodge it in and that he employ  Hudson a broker to sell it but that before any sale be make Watkins arrive in  London and act in all respect as the owner that afterward Hudson apply to the  plaintiff to purchase the logwood which they agree to do and receive part of  it from the warehouse and pay the amount of the purchase money for that part  to Hudson by the order of Watkins after which mico suspect the solvency of  Watkins who have become considerable indebt to he on account of previous  business transact for he as factor serve the plaintiff with a notice not to  pay any more of the purchase money without his order it be subsequent agree by  the assignee of Watkins who have become bankrupt and by mico that the  plaintiff shall receive the rest of the logwood and hold the purchase money  for the benefit of the person who shall appear to be entitle to it the  assignee have bring a action against the plaintiff for the remainder of the  purchase money the bill of interpleader in the present suit be file mico have  by the direction of Watkins effect the insurance on the cargo and be in  advance on this account to the amount of pound he have also pay to the captain  of the ship by order of Watkins the sum of pound and be otherwise under  advance on account of the ship the master of the bolls at the original hear  direct a account of what be due to mico a account of the insurance advance to  the captain and ship account and for his cost of the suit and that he shall be  pay what be due to he out of the money in the hand of the plaintiff the case  now come on for further direction the Lord chancellor order the residue of the  money to be pay over to the assignee of Watkins