Viewing page 67 of 277

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Cotton and received the proceeds of the same. The balance of the Crop which has been gathered is not sufficient to pay the amount due John Grund for rent, and he has had an Attachment levied on this to secure himself. The portion of the crop remaining in the field might probably if taken care of, pay the laborers, and they ought to gather it for that purpose.
Maj C. W. Pierce is of opinion that the negroes have a lien on all the remaining crop and differing from him, we refer the question to you. The landlord of John Grund holds a lien on all he has made on the lands this year, not only for the portion cultivated by him, but also by Finlay — as he does not know Finlay in the transaction, and being a Trustee for  an Estate will be compelled to Enforce it.
In this case which lien that of John Grund for rent, created by Law and existing since the first of January last, is that of the laborers hired by Finlay and created by General Order No 13 on the 7th of November 1867 takes precedence ? In other words if one must lose by the failure of Finlay and his laborers to make a crop, must it be John Grund or the laborers ? Both parties are poor and it will be, we admit a hard case on either, but insist that the lien of the Landlord takes precedence, as he is not responsible for the failure.
your obt Servant, 
M. Can & Foster attys
Bvt Maj Gen'l Wager Swayne
Montgomery
Ala.