October, prior to which time the crop of 1889 would be secured. Brennan’s interest could only be divested by a conveyance in writing. The contract does not purport to convey this interest. It contemplates no title in Barnes except such as he obtains through the foreclosure proceedings. Brennan’s right toredeem was not impaired by the contract, and title under the foreclosure could not attach in time to affect the succeeding crop. It is true, the contract recites that Brennan is to have immediate possession of the land as agent of Barnes, and the title to the crops “shall remain” in Barnes; but that refers to his title to the crops by virtue of his title tothe land. Even if it amounted to a sale of the crop of 1889, it could not prevail as against this plaintiff, because the vendor was left in possession, and the contract was never recorded. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. All concur.
St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, Plaintiff and
Respondent, v. Hiram D. Upton, Defendant and Appellant.
Insurance—Payment of Premiums by Mortgagee.
Mortgage clause in insurance policy construed, and held to embody the promise of the mortgagee to puy insurance premium in case of the failure of the mortgagor to pay it.
(Opinion Filed Nov. 12, 1891.)
APPEAL from district court, Grand Forks county; Hon. Charles F. Templeton, Judge,
William A. Scott, for appellant. Bangs & Fisk, for respondent.
Action by the St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company against Hiram D. Upton for insurance premiums. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.
William A. Scott, for appellant:
There is no privity of contract between the plaintiff and defendant alleged in the complaint, and no such privity exists.
