Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 2).pdf/80

 Gilman v. Thiess, 18 Wis. 554; Taft v. Kessel, 16 Wis. 274; Smith v. Coolbaugh, 21 Wis, 428; Paggeot v. Sixton, 23 Wis, 195; Thomas v. Mitchell, 27 Wis. 414; Newell v. Doty, 33 N. Y. 83; Stone v. Trans. Co., 38 N. Y. 242; Wheeler v. Billings, 38 N. Y. 263; Goodrich v. Thompson, 44 N. Y. 335; Ward v. Oraig, 87 N. Y. 557; McCormick v. Phillips, 34 N. W. Rep. 62; Galloway v. McLean, 2 Dak. 372; Hicks v. Coleman, 25 Cal. 122; Sill v. Reese, 47 Cal. 348. The alleged error that “the findings do not cover and pass on all the material issues in the case" is untenable. No requests were made by appellant for findings in the court below, and of course no exceptions taken to a refusal to find, and the objection, if it exists, can not now be raised. Hurlbut v. Jones, 25 Cal. 226; Calderwood v. Brook, 28 Cal. 151; Hidden v. Jordan, 28 Cal. 302; Lucas v. San Francisco, 28 Cal. 591; Pralus v. Jefferson Co., 34 Cal. 558; Hathaway v. Ryan, 35 Cal 188; Merrill v. Chapman, 34 Cal. 251.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

BARTHOLOMEW, J. This was an action in equity to foreclose what is known under our statute as a "seed lien." The parties defending were prior mortgagees. The findings and conclusions of the trial court were in plaintiff's favor, and judgment accordingly, and defendants appeal. Of the errors assigned three only are noticed in appellant's brief. It is claimed that the complaint fails to state a cause of action, because it does not state that the seed grain was sold by plaintiff to be sown upon any particular land. As was said by this court in Lavin v. Bradley, 1 N. D. 291; 47 N. W. Rep. 384, this seed lien is entirely a creature of the statute, and can be acquired only by strict compliance therewith. But nothing further is required. When the conditions of the statute are met, the lien is perfect; and the statute does not require that the seed grain should be purchased to be sown on any particular tract of land. In this respect it differs from the lien of the mechanic or material man, and the reason for such difference is clear. The material man is given a lien upon the realty on the theory that he parts with his material with the understanding that it will be used in making improvements upon, and thus augmenting the value of, certain