102 SALE AND MORTGAGE. 



gests, to identify the animal or animals is, in general, suffi- 

 cient.201 Thus, a description embracing all a mortgagor's 

 stock, or all in a certain place, may be in other respects vague 

 and uncertain.^''^ Anj ^ description of a number of sheep 

 "now in" a certain county is sufificient, where sheep are often 

 driven from one county to another.^"^ But a description of 

 "sixty head of two and three-year-old steers and forty head 

 of yearling steers" was held too indefinite to give notice of a 

 lien on any particular steers. "There is no suggestion that 

 the steers were all the steers of that age which the mortgagor 

 owned in that township and, if he had others, the mortgage 

 would apply equally to all." ^°* 



Where a horse is accurately described, the mere fact that it 

 was not found at the place where the mortgage recited it was, 

 will not vitiate the instrument.^"® But in a mortgage of cattle 

 and their increase in which they were described separately, 

 the color, age and name being given, but no statement as to 

 the present or past ownership of the property, nor of the 

 place where it was then or had been kept, the description was 

 held insufficient.^"® 



A mortgage of "two cows" where the mortgagor had six 

 was held void for indefaniteness, the description not indicating 



^" Jones Chat. Mort. (4th ed.) 62; Scrafford v. Gibbons, 44 Kan. 533; 

 Waggoner v. Oursler, 54 id. 141; Rhutasel v. Stephens, 68 la. 627; Buck 

 V. Young, I Ind. App. 558; Schneider v. Anderson (Minn.), 79 N. W. 

 Rep. 603; Jennings v. Sparkman, 39 Mo. App. 663; Bozeman v. Fields, 

 44 id. 432; Buck V. Davenport Savings Bk., 29 Neb. 407. 



A fortiori is this true where third parties are not involved: Ranck v. 

 Howard-Sansom Co., 3 Tex. Civ. App. 507. 



"" Evans-Snyder-Buell Co. v. Turner, 143 Mo. 638; Desany v. Thorp 

 (Vt), 39 Atl. Rep. 309; Crisfield v. Neal, 36 Kan. 278; Fisher v. Porter 

 (S. D.), 77 N. W.Rep. 112. 



™ Alferitz V. Ingalls, 83 Fed. Rep. 964. 



°°* Caldwell v. Trowbridge, 68 la. 150. And see, to the same effect, 

 Huse V. Estabrooks, 67 Vt. 223, where, though it was not found that the 

 mortgagor owned more heifers of the ages mentioned, the contrary did 

 not appear. 



"" Jones V. Workman, 65 Wis. 269. ™ Warner v. Wilson, 73 la. 719. 



See as to a description by the names in a Herd Book, Taylor v. Gil- 

 bert, 92 id. 587: Boone City Bank v. Ratkey, 79 id. 215. 



