Appeal from the Fourth District.

Suit to recover the value of certain household furniture alleged to have been wrongfully seized and converted by defendant. The facts were that Amos H. Armstrong and Catherine Armstrong were married in January, 1854; that they lived together a few weeks, when he abandoned her, stating then and frequently afterwards, that he would not live with her—that he would go his way and she might go her way, and that they have never lived together since; that since that time he has been sometimes at Red Bluff, sometimes in San Francisco, and she has been engaged in the furniture business, and at other times in keeping a house known as the “ Antique Castle,” in San Francisco. • She kept this house for two years, bought and paid for furniture, etc., with the knowledge of her husband, who always said in reply to requests from his friends to go and see her, that she could do whatever she pleased and go her way and that he would go his way, and would have nothing to do with her. In May, 1859, Mrs. Armstrong, concluding to stop keeping the “ Antique Castle,” sold and delivered to defendants part of the furniture of the house—though defendants claim in their answer, and offered proof tending to show that one Scarborough owned the furniture and sold it to them. On this point the proof was contradictory, but that fact is immaterial, as this Court assumes the property to have been hers. Defendants sold the property at auction. Subsequently, in June, 1859, Armstrong, the husband, executed to plaintiff a bill of sale of all the furniture, etc., “ belonging to him and heretofore kept in the house known as the ‘ Antique Castle,’ together with all claim for the use thereof and damage done thereto by any person,” authorizing plaintiff to recover the same of any person to whom his wife may have sold it, and revoking and declaring void any such sale.

. Verdict and judgment for defendant; plaintiff appeals.