712   INSURABLE INTEREST

in the subject of the insurance, the bill alleged that he was both creditor and stockholder in amounts greatly in excess of the amount of the policy.

It has been decided that a stockholder has an insurable interest in the specific articles of tangible property belonging to the company. Riggs v. Com. Ins. Co., 21 Am. St. R. (N. Y.), 71G. But we are of opinion that the clause "as his interest may appear at the time" does not refer to the interest of the appointee in the property, but to his interest as a creditor, or otherwise, in the Kimball Town Company. The interest insured in the property was the interest of the Kimball Town Company. * * * If the interest of Donaldson, as receiver of the coal and iron company, in this property had been insured, it would, of course, have been unnecessary to show that he had an insurable interest, but it is not necessary that the appointee to whom the policy is made pay-able should have an insurable interest in the property insured. The clause "loss, if any, payable to Donaldson as his interest may appear at that time," was tantamount to an assignment of the policy by the Kimball Town Co., with the consent of the insurance company, to Donaldson as receiver. * * *

It is admitted by counsel for the insurance company that where a policy contains a clause making the loss payable to a third per-son unconditionally, such third person may maintain a suit upon it in his own name ; but the insistence of counsel is that, where the policy provides for the payment to a third person "as his interest may appear," the assured, and not such third person, must bring the suit. * * * We have examined these cases so far as they have been accessible, and found that in all of them the appointee affirmatively appeared to have a less interest than the sum insured. He was therefore entitled to only a portion of the proceeds of the policy, and an individual suit by him involved a splitting up of a single cause of action. This is the cardinal differential attribute of all the cases cited by defendant's counsel. * * *

In this case the bill alleges that the interest of Donaldson, both as a creditor and stockholder, exceeded the amount of insurance, and hence the question of splitting up a single cause of action does not arise. If the pleadings and proof show that the appointee is entitled to the entire proceeds of the policy, the authori• ties agree that the action may be maintained in his own name. If the appointment is unconditional, no averment in respect of the extent of his interest is essential, but if the policy provides for payment "as his interests may appear," it must be alleged that the appointee is entitled to the entire insurance. * *

The decree of the Chancellor was correct, and must be affirmed.'

8 Suppose after the fire but before the insurance proceeds are paid to the creditor the debtor should go into bankruptcy. Would the creditor have a claim