Pasqual

Appellant brought suit against respondent alleging conversion of seven cows of the value of $266 and damage in the sum of $500 from the conversion. Respondent denied the conversion and damage and filed a cross-complaint alleging conversion by appellant of seven of respondent’s cows to his damage in the sum of $700. A trial was had before the court without a jury, and judgment was rendered against appellant on his complaint, and in favor of respondent on his cross-complaint in the sum of $400. The trial court found that appellant had converted to his own use five cows, the property of respondent, of the value of $400.

Appellant attacks the judgment of the trial court upon two grounds: First, that a certain conditional sales contract whereby one John Beeves, respondent’s vendee, and appellant's vendor, acquired possession, and the right to purchase, the cows in question, was void under the provisions of subdivision 2, section 6, of the “Hide and Brand Law” (Stats. 1921, chap. 725, p. 1248); and, second, that the findings of the trial court as to the ownership of the five cows and their value were not supported by the evidence.

The transfer of the cows from respondent to Beeves was…