Sec 182

When only a bare charge of chattels is given by the owner to a bailee, no title passes to the bailee, there being no concurrence of minds to one and the same disposition of the particular thing.1 Hence, when the owner of bank notes gives them to be changed to a party who takes them avowedly for this purpose, but afterwards appropriates them, no title passes.2 "A parting with the property of the goods could only be effected by a contract, which required the assent of two minds; but in this case there was not the assent of the mind either of the prosecutor or of the prisoner, the prosecutor only meaning to part with his notes on the faith of having the gold in return, and the prisoner never meaning to barter but to steal."3

Sec 183

If A., falsely claiming to be B.'s servant, or to have been sent for the goods by B., obtains goods from C, C. intending them for B., then, as there is no contract between A. and C, no title to the goods vests in A. There is no consent of minds to one and the same thing; the property remains in C.4 This rule applies to all cases of false personation.5 And it has been ruled in the House of Lords6 that a person thus fraudulently obtaining goods passes no title even to an innocent vendee.7- It is otherwise, however, when the mistake is as to the merits or solvency of a particular person. It is on this distinction that the legislation and consequent adjudications on the subject of false pretences are based. Property does not pass in cases of fraudulent personation, but it does pass when there is no such personation, notwithstanding the solvency of the party buying may have been falsely represented by him. And it is to meet the latter classes of cases that the statutes of false pretences were enacted.1 The general rule is that where there is an essential error as to the identity of parties, this precludes contract, though it is otherwise as to matters relating to solvency or other qualifications.2

No title passes when only bare charge is given.

No title passes in false personation.

1 Wh. Cr. L. 8th ed. sec 915 et seq. See infra, sec 292, 730 et seq., 793. As to bona fide purchaser see infra, sec 211, 291, 347, 352.

2 Wh. Cr. L. 8th ed. sec 974.

3 Wood, B., R. v. Oliver, cited 4 Taunt. 274; R. v. Williams, 6 C. & P. 390; R. v. Grumble, L. R. 2 C. C. 1; Hildebrand v. People, 56 N. Y. 394 ; and see fully infra, sec 291, for other distinctions. That goods thus fraudulently obtained may be followed into other hands, see infra, sec 734. That there is no market overt in this country, see infra, sec 734.

4 Infra, sec 291; Hardman v. Booth, 1 H. & C. 803; Smith v. Wheatcroft, L. R. 9 Ch. D. sec 223 ; Cundy v. Lindsay, L. R. 3 Ap. Cas. 459, aff. ; Lindsay v. Cundy, L. R. 2 Q. B. D. 96; s, c, 1 Q'. B, D. 348 ; Hollins v. Fowler, L.R. 7, H. L. 757 ; R. v. Gillings, 1 F. & F. 36; R. v. Hench, R. & R. 163 ; Moody v. Blake, 117 Mass. 231 ; Barker v. Dinsmore, 72 Penn. St. 427 ; and cases cited infra, sec 291-2.

5 Cundy v. Lindsay, L. R. 3 Ap. Cas. 459 ; Barnet exparte, L. R. 3 Ch. D. 123.

6 Hollins, v. Fowler, L. R. 7 H. L. 757..

7 Wh. on Agency, sec 731.