In re Beard
In re Beard
Opinion of the Court
The parties to this case are all gentlemen mainly engaged in agricultural pursuits. In addition to thelse, the Chenaults conduct a country store at the “forks of the road” not far from Washington, in the county of Wilkes. • Since before the American Revolution that historic county has proudly worn its name in honor of that John Wilkes, the famous editor of the North Briton, whosel implacable hostility to King George III captivated the affection of Georgians in those early days. The county town, Washington, was given its famous name, not for the Father of his Country, but for Col. Washington, commanding those stark Virginian riflemen, ancestors of the “Stonewall Brigade” who covered Braddock’s retreat and saved the remnants .of his routed redcoats.
It is not unnatural that a people with such independent antecedents should have independent business methods. The case is illustrative of this. The Chenaults, in their business of “furnishing” the adjacent planters, took many crop mortgages. They, however, recorded none of them. Such record might have been an imputation on the Southern gelntlemen with whom dealt these merchants of Huguenot strain. Now, a crop mortgage is a favored security in Georgia. It attaches, not only to the “growing crop,” whether it has begun to grow, or actually grows, or ever grows. It secures payment for the guano or other fertilizer, natural or artificial, which stimulates and perfects the snowy fruitage of our royal staple, or the dark green of the Indian corn whose squares of tasselling plumes, swayed o’er broad acres by the soft breath of Southern winds, are glorious like a.n army with banners. The crop mortgage also supplies rations for Scipio Africanus and his patient mule, who, notwithstanding the obloquy they mutually wear, have no mean place in our economy. Such mortgage, indeed, is regarded in Georgia as superior in dignity to a court judgment, which in less favored states might have the'priority of its date. This is made plain by section 3349 of our Code, and has been the law since the act of 1899:
“The lien of mortgages on crops, which mortgages are given to secure the payment of debts for money, supplies, and other articles of necessity, including live stock, to aid in making and gathering such crop, shall be superior to judgments of older date than such mortgages.”
Now the Chenaults hold a mortgage of that superior sort. It covered the cotton to be grown on certain specified lands and certain mules. Some of the mules have departed this life, but the value of the cotton is in hand. Another creditor of Beard, the bankrupt, who executed this crop mortgage, is A. S. Andelrson. He is the owner of a promissory note given long ago by Beard. In this the payee appears to be “Rasin Fert. Co.,” which we construe to mean the “Rasin Fertilizer Company.” Of this company, thel record is silent. It has probably long been numbered with the things that once were and are not. The note was made at the remote period of May 4, 1894. A. S. Anderson is the transfelree of this note, but with that neighborly spirit which pervades in the glorious county of Wilkes (which we may remember en passant was the home of the Mirabeau of the South, Robert Toombs, who is reputed to have) said, long ago, that he would
“All my crop of cotton of 100 acres now up and growing on lands of B. M. Walton: also :>0 acres of corn on same xilace up and growing, 20 acres of cotton on Mrs. i>. J. Hill’s place up and growing.”
It is true that this description leaves something to imagination; but it has seemed sufficient to the courts of the state, by whose rulings on such questions we are probably controlled. In Read Phosphate Company v. Weichselbaum Company, 1 Ga. App. 420, 58 S. E. 122, it is held that a mortgage which describes the property as “all my crops, corn, cotton, etc., now up and growing, on about 240 acres of Idtid, all of the above property is in Jackson District, county and state aforesaid,” may be explained by parol evidence, so as to point out and identify such property, and is good as between thel parties to the mortgage. If it may he explained by parol evidence, surely it may be identified by admission in judicio; and the counsel for the trustee oil this hearing admitted that the cotton figuratively before the court was the cotton raised on the lands therein mentioned.
The referee in bankruptcy has sustained the validity of this crop mortgage which Beard gave to the Chenaults, in order to secure means to make the very cotton, the proceeds of which are now before the court. We think that the law of the state and the principles of equity as well uphold this decision; beside the leisurely methods adopted by Andelrson for the enforcement of his 18 years old note, while enhancing the charm of life, where life is happiest in the county of Wilkes, are not favored by the law. Doubtless Anderson’s long and langorous repose has-made him a happier man. Doubtless it has added to his length of days. But is there not the maxim old, “Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt,” which with liberal interpretation imports, “A Georgia, crop mortgage is not conducive to safe repose.”
Reference
- Full Case Name
- In re BEARD
- Status
- Published