LOGGING LIENS. In some states, persons employed in logging have a lien for services. It exists in favor of a cook and his assistant at a logging camp;' Breault v. Archambault, 64 Minn. 420, 67 N. W. 348, 58 Am. St. Rep. 545; a blacksmith employed in shoeing horses and mending tools at the camp ; id.; persons contracting to cut, skid, and haul logs and to peel bark to be paid for by the thousand ; Haifa v. Person, 1 Pa. Super. Ct. 367; one who blasts rocks to make a passage • for logs ; Duggan v. Logging Co., 10 Wash. 84, 38 Pac. 856; one who furnishes supplies ; Stacy v. Bryant, 73 Wis. 14, 40 N. W. 632 ; a rafter of logg ; Houghton v. Busch, 101 Mich. 267, 59 N. W. 621; a Mill owner ; Patterson v. Graham, 164 Pa. 234, 30 Atl. 247. But mere contractors have not a lien; Kieldsen v. Wil son, 77 Mich. 45, 43 N. W. 1054; or one who furnishes a horse, harness, and sleds at a specified price per month ; Richardson v. Hoxie, 90 Me. 227, 38 Atl. 142; or one who employs men to do the work but does not directly labor himself; Campbell v. Mfg. Co., 11 Wash. 204, 39 Pac. 451; or one cutting without right; Gates v. Boom Co., 70 Mich. 309, 38 N. W. 245 ; or the owner of an ox hired to haul the logs ; Lohman v. Peterson, 87 Wis. 227, 58 N. W. 407. Such liens have been held to include not only manual labor of the lienor, but also that performed by his teams and servants, under a contract for a gross sum per month for both ; Breault v. Archambault, 64 Minn. 420, 67 N. W. 348, 58 Am. St. Rep. 545.
The amount of the lien is a question for the jury; Menery v. Backus, 107 Mich. 329,
65 N. W. 235 ; and so is the question whether a levy under such lien is excessive ; Backus v. Barber, 107 Mich. 468, 65 N. W. 379; and the lien is not vitiated by an excessive levy ; id.
The lien of a boom company attaches to part of a single bailment for charges on logs previously delivered, but it is confined to logs of the same mark and not a general lien upon all logs of the same owner ; Akeley v. Boom Co., 64 Minn. 108, 67 N. W. 208 ; recording is not required to bind an innocent purchaser, possession being equivalent to no tide ; id. It may be waived either by con tract or .a course of dealing inconsistent with its existence, or by an extension of time for payment of charges ; id.
One who cuts and rafts logs under a con tract which, by reasonable construction, en titles him to retain possession until paid for his services,, has a common-law lien thereon; Houghton v. Busch, 101 Mich. 267, 59 N. W. 621; but one with whom the owner of contracts for its cutting and delivery in his mill-pond has not ; Fitzgerald v. Elliott, 162 Pa. 118, 29 Atl. 346, 42 Am. St. Rep. 812.
The execution and performance of a con tract for the sale of standing timber at so much per acre, to be cut and hauled by the purchaser who owns a sawmill, is held un der the Georgia Civil Code, not to give the seller a lien on the sawmill and products; Giles v. Gano, 102 Ga. 593, 27 S. E. 730.