| Ala. | Nov 15, 1893
This case must be dealt with as if May-field had personal knowledge of Spiva’s mortgage on the animal in controversy. Such is the effect of our statutes of registration. This being so, the latter, (Spiva) did nothing and said nothing to authorize Mayfield to place the animal under a lien which can override the prior mortgage lien. Jones, Chat. Mortg., § 472.
Affirmed.