#### J. B. PERRY v. DUNCAN BRAGG.

Agricultural Lien — Description.

A description in an agricultural lien of the land upon which the crops were to be grown as “ a tract of land in Granville County, known as the C. H. Dement, deceased, or any other lands he (defendant) may cultivate during the year 1889,” is not void for uncertainty as to the “ Dement ” tract (which may be aided by parol proof), but is void in respect to the other lands mentioned.

Civil actioN, tried at January Term, 1891, of GraNVille Superior Court, Boykin, J., presiding.

Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appealed.

*304 Mr. N. Y Gulley (by brief), for plaintiff.

Mr. J. W. Hays (by brief), for defendant.

Clark, J.:

This action is to recover certain crops by virtue of an agricultural lien thereon given by the defendant to the plaintiff. The said lien describes the lands on which such crops are to be raised, as follows: “Upon a tract of land in Granville County, known as the C. H. Dement, deceased, or any other lands he (the defendant) may cultivate during the year 1888.” The Court ruled that the description of the land on which the crops were raised was too vague and uncertain to pass title to said crops, and rendered judgment on that ground against the plaintiff, to which he excepted. The record discloses no other ruling of the Judge, nor any other exception by appellant.

It has been held in Weil v. Flowers, ante, 212, that a description, similar to that above recited, was valid and sufficient as to crops raised by the defendant during the year on the land in the county named “known as C. H. Dement, deceased,” and that such description is not rendered invalid and insufficient by the superadded words, “ or any other lands he may cultivate.” The latter words are mere sur-plusage, not vitiating the definite words preceding them, “the land in Granvillé County known as C. H. Dement, deceased,” which admit of parol proof to identify it.

There is no suggestion by exception, nor in the printed briefs filed by counsel, that the land of “ C. H. Dement, deceased,” was not sufficiently identified by proof, but if there is any doubt on that point, the facts will be developed in a new trial.

Error.