delivered the opinion of the court.
This is а suit brought by the respondent, Chambers, against Waskey and others, to recover possession of a placer mining claim and damages.for gold extracted from the same. Waskey defеnded under two leases from the parties alleged by him to be the owners. The plaintiff had a vеrdict and a judgment which was affirmed by a majority of the Circuit Court of Appeals, 172 Fed. Rep. 73,
The act of Congress reads, “Every conveyance of real propеrty within the district hereafter made which shall not be filed for record as provided in this chapter shall be void against any subsequent innocent purchaser in good faith and for a valuable consideration of the same real property, or any portion thereof, whose conveyance shall be first duly recorded.” Act of June 6,1900, c. 786, Tit. 3, § 98, 31 Stat. 321, 505. Code, Part Y, § 98. The Circuit Court of Apрeals went on the ground that a lease creates only a chattel interest and is not а conveyance and therefore is not within the protection of the statute. But it is obvious that in principle the right of a lessee is the same as that of a purchaser in fee, and it would be a great misfortune, especially to mining interests, if a man taking a lease from those whom the record showed and he believed *566 to be the owners, were liable, after spending large sums of money on the faith of it, to be turned out by an undisclosed claimant on the strength of an unrecorded deed. We find no words in the statute that require such a result. On the contrary, the word “ conveyance ” is defined, although for other purposes, as embracing every written instrument except a will by which any interest in lands is created. Act of 1900, Tit. 3, § 136, 31 Stat. 510. Code, Part V; § 136. See Tit. 2, § 1046, 31 Stat. 493. Code, Part IV, § 1046. And the statute provides for the recording of leases, as well as of deeds and grants, Act of 1900, Tit. 1, § 15, 31 Stat. 327. Code, Part III, § lfi. Blackstone defines a lease as a conveyance, 2 Comm. 317, and in Shepard’s Touchstone, 267, leases are ranked under the head of grants, — ‘as in other grants.’ The pоint does not need authority except to exclude the notion that the statute uses the wоrd in a narrower sense.
It is said that Waskey was not a purchaser for value. By the lease of June 11 he agreed to enter at once and work the mine continuously and to pay thirty pеr cent of the gold and precious minerals or metals extracted. The other agreеment was similar, except that' one-eighth was to go to Whittren, one-eighth to Eadie and the remainder, after paying mining expenses, to be divided between Waskey and Eadie. His working the mine wаs a valuable consideration and none the less so if in the event he was reimbursed for his expenditures and made a profit for his trouble.
Waskey was in possession and at work before the deed to Chambers was filed for recording, but we do not have to consider whether possеssion under the lease would have the same effect as getting the later instrument recordеd before the earlier one under § 98 above quoted. For although the deed to Chambers wаs filed before the leases, it had no efféct as against people without actual nоtice. It never had but one witness, two being necessary to au
*567
thorize the recording of a deed, and the only acknowledgment was before the alteration. Therefore it was filed withоut authority, was not entitled to registration, and, as we have said, had no effect as against the petitioner. Act of 1900, Tit. 1, § 15. Title 3, §§ 82, 95. 31 Stat. 327,' 503, 505. Code, Part III, § 15. Part Y, §§ 82, 94.
Alaska Exploration Co.
v.
Northern Mining & Trading Co.,
152 Fed. Rep. 145.
Judgment reversed.