
    Benjamin Brown v. William H. Kirkman et al.
    Under the act of March 16, 1838, Swan’s Statutes, 268, a mortgage lien is perfected by delivering the mortgage for record to the recorder of the proper county^
    Such lien is not defeated, as to a subsequent incumbrancer with notice in fact, by a mistake of the recorder in making the record.
    This is a bill in chancery reserved in the district court in Monroe county.
    William H. Kirkman purchased of Silas Severance the east half of the southwest quarter of section 28, township 6, range 8, in the Zanesville land district, in Monroe county, Ohio, and, to secure the purchase money, on the 29th December, 1845, executed and delivered to Severance a mortgage *upon said premises, which was entered for record with the recorder of Monroe county, and recorded February 13, 1846.
    In making the record, the recorder described the premises as the southeast instead of the southwest quarter of the section.
    The complainant, having become the assignee of the mortgage, filed his bill for foreclosure.
    On the 16th May, 1846, Kirkman executed and delivered to the defendant, Asbury Gardner, another mortgage upon the same premises to secure the payment of $343, which was entered for record and recorded May 30,1846, and which is now set up by Gardner as a prior lien upon the premises.
    Prior to the date of his own mortgage, Gardner had notice in fact of the mortgage to Severance.
    Hollister, for complainant.
    
      Stansel v. Roberts, 13 Ohio, 148 ; Mayhew v. Parker, 14 Id. 431'; Holliday v. Franklin Bank, 16 Id. 533; Beverly v. Ellis, 1 Rand. 102 ; 14 Yt. 14 ; 10 Ala. 368.
    
      I). Peck & I. E. Eaton, for Gardner.
   Corwin, J.

If is satisfactorily shown in the case that, prior to the date of the mortgage to Gardner, he had notice that Kirkman had given the mortgage upon the premises to Severance to secure the purchase money for the same; but it is claimed that if the record of a mortgage be materially defective, or misdescribe the mortgaged premises, it is inoperative as to all subsequent purchasers or incumbrances.

By the act of March 16, 1838, Swan’s Stat. 268, it is declared “that mortgage deeds do and shall take effect and have preference from the time the same are delivered to the recorder of the proper county to be by him entered on record,” etc.; and there can be no doubt that, under this statute, when the mortgage to Severance, being in all other respects regular and valid, was delivered to. the recorder for record, its execution was completed, and it created a valid lien upon the premises.

*It is the object and purpose of a record to furnish notice to the world of the existence of titles and incumbrances, and when the record is made it is constructive notice to everybody of what it contains, although no actual notice be had; and it is true that a record will only be considered as furnishing constructive notice when its examination will furnish actual notice. But although it can not be said that Gardner was bound to take notice of the mortgage to Severance from the record, or that the record was sufficient to put him upon inquiry, yet the lien had been perfected by the entry of the mortgage for record, and Gardner had notice of its existence independently of the record. And when the execution of a mortgage has been in all respects perfected, and a lien has been created under the provisions of the act before recited, a subsequent incumbrancer, having notice, in fact, of its existence, can not claim that such lien has been defeated, because the record did not furnish him the notice which he already had. /

And this conclusion in no manner conflicts with either of the cases m the 13th, 14th, and 16th Ohio Reports, but is in entire consonance with the rules there recognized.

Eecree for complainant.  