Sabin

(after stating the facts as above). If the $5,000 paid by the lessee at the time of executing the lease was a mere advancement to secure the faithful performance of the covenants of the lease, the lessee or his successor in interest was entitled to a return of the money thus advanced, upon the determination' of the lease, less the amount' of any rent due and unpaid at the time of such determination. But, if the $5,000 was paid as a consideration for the execution of the lease, no part of that consideration was recoverable, either by the lessee or by the trustee in bankruptcy. We think all the authorities are agreed upon these two propositions. Yuen Suey v. Fleshman, 65 Or. 606 , 133 P. 803 , Ann. Cas. 1915A, 1072; Alvord v. Banfield, 85 Or. 49 , 166 P. 549 ; Moumal v. Parkhurst, 89 Or. 248 , 173 P. 669 ; Dutton v. Christie, 63 Wash. 372 , 115 P. 856 ; Barrett v. Monro, 69 Wash. 229 , 124 P. 369 , 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 763; Ramish v. Workman, 33 Cal. App. 19 , 164 P. 26 ; Curtis v. Arnold, 43 Cal. App. 97 , 184 P. 510 ; Galbraith v. Wood, 124 Minn. 210 , 144 N. W. 948 , 50 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1034, Ann. Cas. 1915B, 609.

There may be no little difficulty in reconciling all the cases on…