The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1876-05-17
Supreme Court Decision.

MONDAY, MAY 10, 1876
Docroa DeTI es-aa. Appeal from the
JSo. T. HETH adm, ct oLS Gazoo county.
OPlnlea Of tie Court BY CHALMERS. J.
hetteF elucidated by di<earling the eompli-
cations growing out of the institution of
two proceedings touching the same subject
matter, and by leaving out of view The
rightsof E0nehe. the morTgagee of the ia
bIrePs who is simply substitute pro tdAto
totheir rights in the crop, II any lhey have
The .o'lnwing statement Is, perhaps. suit
fieient to.present the merits OF the case;
Emm4 Boyd, as aiministratrix of her
deceased husband in consideration OF a
yearly rental OF $i,100, assigned 10 Gibson
an nnexpirt d lease upon a sixteenth section
(scho ] land) In 1azoo county. The lease
had three years 10 run, anu was assigned
for the entire term. In order 10 secure the
rent, which was to become due on the lst OF
December of each year, there WAS m braced
In the Contract BY which the lease w a as
signed, a mortgage By Gibson, OF ''all The
ayr cultural products grown ana produced
on the place by him." Thereafter. Gibson
entered into u written contract with various
laborers. who are the appellants here
which contract i substantially what Is
known in the country rs cropping on the
shares" BY its terms, he must furnish
them with land aud mules, and feed Tor the
cultivate and gather the crop. and TO Adl-
vide with said Gibson the entire crop OF
corn, cotton, etc, that they may make upon
his lands. in equal shares to-wlt: one-hait
to said Gibson and one half 10 them
The, laborers subsequently, executed
mortgage to Fouchr, "A merchant, To cover
advances of supplies lie IN ight IN axe to them
during the ear.
Gibson falling to pay his rent to Mrs.
Bovd at the time specified, ard the condi-
10 ~ IA 4 -
the latter seize all tile cotton which had
been gathered, by writ OF repevin. The
lab prers tlIereupon flied their bill 10 assert
their rights to one-haif OF the cotton seized.
A bill was subsequently, flied br the admin
istrator de botts non OF Boyd, the widow
having resigned These are the two cases
which are consolidated 1t Will be seen
that the gu, stion presented Is IS TO the
right of Bnyd's estate TO subject 20 their
rent cIain secur,d d, as j. was, by mortgage,
the shares of the laborers in the crop. The
Chancellor held that such shares were
bound, and from the decree So holding, The
iaborers and their Iii ,rtsASee Fouche,
have appealed.
The litigation arose previous to the pas
sage of any OF our recent statutes giving
and regulating liens Oh crops, anu must,
therefore. be considered Independently OF
them. The decree of the Chancellor is
sought to be upheld here, and was, GouOt-
less, vested by him Oh the a>sum p non that
the rent charge was of itself. or was consti-
tuted BY the mortgage, "A covenant roaming
with the land and. therefore, binding Oh all
sab >equelt holders. This i true a. 10 all
assignees Of the i.ase. (Trv-
lor's Landlord aud Tenant, >eclion> 2iO 26i,
81. 473, 443, and eases cite
In order, however, for the coy pant 10 be
binding upon subsequent occupants of the
land, they mist be assignees OF the lease for
the full term as to the whole or part OF the
land. 1t seems we'll settled that it only
nf a err a Ia y
sought to he bound, that such parry is an
and not liable to the original
lessor. (Taylor's Landlord and Tenant,
section AS; Washbnrn's Reat Property
vs.. Morris, SO n Y, Oh; Kahn ". HoXie,
, Hilton, 3l6.
InasmuoI as Gibson's term was tor three
years, and that of the laborers for but one,
the counsel tor the latter insists that they
were under-tenants. aud invokcs IN their
behalf the doctrine just stated. We doubt
whether the laborers can be regarded az
under-tenantS, or as being tenants at all ot
the land, in any proper legal sense OF the
word.
Tenautcy usually carries with it the idea
OF q legal ownership of term in the land,
which can be subjected to sale under exc
cution, and also the exclusive oWnership OF
the products t. be raised thereon: TINS
would be SO, even where the rent reserved
was q portion Of the products. In SUCH case
the relation of landlord and tenant would
exist, and the legal title to the cLpp would
rest in the tenant. Exactly what relation
is created between the parties by the con-
tract to crop OH the shares, is difficult TO
define. 1t is much discussed by the counts
of the New England States where such coz
tracts have been long common, and - soI1e
extent in the New York Reports. 4 some
what extensive eXaminqliop Qf these gases
indicates thrt they are usually regar led as
con stituting the parties tenants in gonna Oh
of the crop, hut hot joint ttnauts, nor ten
ants in common of the land. Many Of the
authoriti,s are collCc.ei in the notes to
Freeman on Co-tenancy and PartII ION, sec
ton 100. The subject was before us in
Belts VS.. Ratlih go Miss, % }, where the
same conclusion was reached as TO he teu-
ancy in common of the crQa.
The labGrers III the case 1t bar having no
tenure OF term in the land. or at =: oSJ an
unde: tenancy, there could be no priority
between them and the original lesGaF. nor
could they be hanHa W sny o0Fenon.s run
Ming WIFI the land.
Was the crop sos bound-,iIher by the
contract of rent between the original par
ties, or by the mortgage given To secure tn"
same-that Gibson could not contract with
the laborers to allow them a part thereof for
their labor? There h4ins no Hen for rent
in this QtaGe p1tii the recent statutes es alb
fishing It, there was nothing in the nature
of the claim TO bind the cropin this instance.
The mortgage was fi'e for record on the
contract wifi the ia6ofers. There is
nothing ia show which event transpired
hrst, nor any proof u actual knowledge of
the mortgage upon the part OF the laborers.
Anart from thi5, we are of opinion that the
mortgage bg q bson, of such agricultural
pr6ckc's rs '-were to be produced by him"
in view of the general custom OF the coun-
try, and of the knowledge on the part of
the lessor that the crop must be brought
into exist ence by labor, did not preclude
him from contracting To-; thai labor on the
terms usual in she country, and thar, in the
absence of all fraud, collision or unfair con-
tracts between himself and his laborcrs, all
that the mortgagee could fairly claim was
to subject his interest i'll the crop,
The decree Will be reYersed, With diree-
tionS to proceed IN. accordance With the
views here announced,
-- CHALMERS, j..
tMr. Justice Campbell, being of counsel
below, took no part