
    HEARD NOVEMBER TERM, 1874.
    Hunter vs. Wardlaw & Edwards.
    A gave B an agricultural lien for $175, with a mortgage of chattels as further security. From sales of the crop and some of the chattels A paid B $192.25, but gave no directions as to the application of the money. B's whole account against A amounted to $241.52: Held, That the mortgage was satisfied.
    Before COOKE, J., at Abbeville, April, 1874.
    Action by Samuel Hunter, appellant, against Wardlaw & Edwards, respondents, to recover the possession of a mare and a mule.
    
      On the 8th of March, 1872, the appellant gave to the respondent an agricultural lien, under the Act, for an amount not to exceed $175, with a mortgage of the mare and mule and other chattels as further security. From sales of the crop and also of a yoke of oxen and cart included in the mortgage, appellant paid respondents $192.25, but gave no direction as to the application of the money. Respondents’ whole account against appellant, commencing in January and ending 4th of November, 1872, amounted to $241.52. The balance due was $48.57, and for this balance respondents, in December, 1873, seized the mare and mule under the mortgage, and thereupon this action was commenced.
    The appellant contended that the mortgage was satisfied by the payments made, but His Honor overruled the defense and instructed the jury to find for the respondents, which they did.
    Hunter appealed on several grounds — the first of which was that the mortgage was satisfied.
    
      Noble, for appellant.
    
      Cothran, contra.
    January 20, 1875.
   The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Wright, A. J.

The appellant executed to the respondent an instrument in writing, called an agricultural lien, on all his crop to be grown during the year 1872; and, to further secure respondents, this instrument reads as follows: “I do hereby mortgage to said Wardlaw & Edwards all my horses, mules and other stock, to wit: One bay mare, (Lucy,) one bay mule, (Jim,) two milk cows, (one white and one red,) one yoke of oxen, (Buck and Bill.)”

The amount advanced to appellant was one hundred and seventy-five dollars ($175.)

The appellant paid at various times during the year 1872 (the year for which the lien was given) one hundred and ninety-two dollars and ninety-five cents ($192.95); aud this amount of money was realized from the sale of the crop raised in the same year, and algo by the sale of beeves and the yoke of oxen mentioned in the instrument of writing called the agricultural lien. Therefore the payment of the debt for which the lien was given was satisfied, and His Honor the presiding Judge should have so held.

The first ground of appeal fully disposes of this case.

The motion is granted, and a new trial ordered.

Moses, C. J., and Willard, A. J., concurred.  