Troops

FOREIGN. See Foreign* Troops. TROVER (Fr. trouver, to tind). In Practice. A form of action which lies to recover damages against one who has, without right, converted to his own use goods or personal chattels in which the plaintiff has a general or special property. A generic name, applied to those torts, arising from the unlawful conversion of any particular piece of personal property owned by another. Spellman v. R. Co., 35 S. C. 475, 14 S. E. 017, 28 Am. St. Rep. 858. In form it is a fiction: in substance, a remedy to recover the value of personal chattels wrongfully converted by another to his own use. 1 Burr. 31. The action was originally an action of trespass on the case where goods were found by the defendant and retained against the plaintiff's rightful claim. of action lies whether the goods camte into the defendant’s possession by finding or otherwise, if he fails to deliver them upon the rightful claim of the plaintiff. It differs from detinue and replevin in this, that it is brought for damages and not tor the specific articles; and from trespass in this, that the injury is not necessarily a forcible one, as trover may be brought in any case where trespass for injury to personal property will lie; but the converse is not true. In case possession was gained by a trespass, the plaintiff by bringing his action in this form waives his right to damages for the taking, and is confined to the* injury resulting from the conversion; Greenfield Bank v. Leavitt, 17 Pick. (Mass.) 1, 28 Am. Dec. 268; Mc Near v. Atwood, 17 Me. 434. The action lies for one who has a general or absolute property; Bull. N. Pi 33; Pope v. Tucker, 23 Ga. 484; together with a right to immediate possession; 1 Ry. & M. 99; Clark v. Draper, 19 N. H. 419; Stewart v. Bright, 6 Iloust. (Del.) 344; see Owens v. Weedman, S2 111. 409; Landon v. Emmons, 97 Mass. 37; as, for example, a vendor of property sold upon condition not fulfilled; Houston v. Dyche, 1 Meigs (Tenn.) 76, 33 Am. Dec. 130; or a special property, including actual possession as against a stranger; 2 SauiuL 47; Eaton v. Lynde, 15 Mass. 242; Coffin v. Anderson, 4 Blackf. (Ind.) 395; as, for example, a sheriff holding under rightful process; Blackley v. Sheldon, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 32; a mortgagee in possession; Reynolds v. Shuler, 5 Cow. (N. Y.) 323; a simple bailee; see Hopper v. Miller, 76 N. C. 402; Brown v. Dempsey, 95 I’a. 243; Clark v. Bell, 61 Ga. 147; or even a finder merely; Mc Laughlin v. Waite, 9 Cow. (N. Y.) 670; and including lawful custody and a right of detention as against the general owner of the goods or chattels; Spoor v. Holland, 8 Wend. (N. Y.) 445, 24 Am. Dec. 37; M’Connell v. Maxwell, 3 Blackf. (Ind.) 419, 20 Am. Dec. 428. An executor or administrator is held an absolute owner by relation from the death of the decedent. And he may maintain an action for a conversion in the lifetime of the decedent; Towle v. Lovet, 6 Mass. 394; and is liable for a conversion by the decedent; Avery v. Moore, 1 N. C. 362, 1 Am. Dec. 5C0. Trustees having title to chattels with an immediate right of possession may sue in trover for the chattels, although they may never have taken actual possession, but have allowed the goods to remain in the occupation of their cestui que trust; [1891] 2 Ch. 172. The property affected must be some personal chattel; Mather v. Ministers of Trinity Church, 3 S. & R. (Pa.) 513, 8 Am. Dec. 663; specifically set off as the plaintiff’s; 4 B. & C. 948; Chapman v. Searle, 3 Pick. (Mass.) 38; including title deeds; Weiser v. Zeisinger, 2 Yeates (Pa.) 537; a copy of a record; Sawyer v. Baldwin, 11 Pick. (Mass.) 492; money, though no't tied up; Donohue v. Henry, 4 E. D. Smith (N. Y.) 162; negotiable securities; 3 B. & O. 45; Todd v. Crookshanks, but reclaimed; Amory y. Flyn, 10 Johns. (N. Y.) 102, 0 Am. Dec. 316; trees and crops severed from the inheritance; Davis v. Barnes, 3 Mo. 137; James v. Snelson, 3 Mo. 393; Nelson v. Burt, 15 Mass. 204; Sampson v. Hammond, 4 Cal. 184. It will lie by a surviving partner to recover possession of the firm assets as against the representatives of the deceased partners; Hawkins v. Capron, 17 R. I. 679, 24 Atl. 46G. It will not lie for property in custody of the law; Jenner v. Joliffe, 9 Johns. (N. Y.) 381; if rightfully held; see Kennedy’s Heirs V. Kennedy’s Heirs, 2 Ala. 576; or to which the. title must be determined by a court of peculiar jurisdiction only; 1 Cam. & N. 115; or where the bailee has lost the property, or had it stolen, or it has been destroyed by want of due care; Simmons v. Sikes, 24 N. C. 98. Unless an actual conversion by bailee be shown, an action of trover against him will not lie without a previous demand for the goods; Loveless v. Fowler, 79 Ga. 134, 4 S. E. 103, 11 Am. St. Rep. 407. See Conversion. There must have been a conversion of the property by the defendant; Stone v. Waggoner, 8 Ark. 204. And a waiver of such conversion will defeat the action; Hewes v. Parkman, 20 Pick. (Mass.) 90. Nondelivery of goods by a vessel is not a conversion of the goods; 35 U. S. App. 369. See Conversion. The declaration must state a rightful possession of the goods by the plaintiff; Seivier v. Holliday, Hempst. 160, Fed. Cas. No. 12,- 680a; but need not show the nature or evidence of plaintiff’s title; Warren v. Dwyer, 91 Mich. 414, 51 N. W. 1062; it must describe the goods with convenient certainty, though not so accurately as in detinue; Bull. N. P. 32; Hall v. Burgess, 5 Gray (Mass.) 12; must formally allege a finding by the defendant, and must aver a conversion; Decker v. Mathews, 12 N. Y. 313. It is not indispensable to state the price or value of the tiling converted; Pearpoint v. Henry, 2 Wash. (Va.) 192; and where there is an actual conversion of property, demand before action is not necessary; Baker v. Lothrop, 155 Mass. 376, 29 N. E. 643; Knipper v. Blumenthal, 107 Mo. 665, 18 S. W. 23. The plea of not guilty raises the general issue. Judgment, when for the plaintiff, is that he recover his damages and costs, or, in some states, in the alternative, that the defendant restore the goods or pay, etc.; Mitchell v. Printup, 19 Ga. 579; when for the defendant, that he recover his costs. The measure of damages is the value of the property at the time of the conversion, with interest; Jenkins v. Mc Conico, 26 Ala. 213; Polk’s Adm’r v. Allen, 19 Mo. 467; Forbes v. R. Co., 133 Mass. 158. See the History of Trover by James Barr

Conveys the idea of an armed body of soldiers whose sole occupation is war or service, answering to the regular army.' The organization of the active militia of a State bears no likeness to such a body. It is simply a do- ' United States v. Holliday, 3 Wall. 419 (1865). ••i L. tribunal, platform for a magistrate, judgmentseat: tribunus, chief of a tribe: tribus, one of the three original families: fri-, three. ' Smith V. City of Waterbury, 54 Conn, 178 (1886). • United States v. Leng, 18 F. R. 20 (1883), cases. Brown, J.; United States v. Arredondo, 6 Pet. *729 (1832); Belcher v. Linn, 34 How. 523 (1800); 132 Mass. 43. ».[4 Bl. Com. 363. • See Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 157 (1876); 5 Cal. 347; 23 Ga. 57; 43 Me. 11; 14 N. J. L. 195; 15 S. & R. mestic force, as distinguished from regular troops, to be called into service when the exigencies of the State raalie it necessary.' See Militia.