Phelps

— This action was brought under the mechanic’s lien act of 1868: Stats. 1867-68, p. 598. The plain *654 tiff made all the lienholders defendants, in accordance with the fifth subdivision of section 10. All the lienholders filed their respective petitions of intervention. On motion of the defendants, who are alleged to be the owners of the mine, the several petitions were dismissed. Thereupon the lienholders moved that their respective petitions stand as their respective answers, but the motion was denied.

The first subdivision of section 10 provides that the pleadings in an action brought under that act “shall be the same as in other cases” in the district courts; that is to say, the pleadings shall conform to the provisions of the code. The lienholders having been made defendants, and having, as such defendants, the right to present their claims for adjudication, were not authorized to change their position to that of interveners.

But their petitions should have been allowed to stand as their answers. They contain all the allegations which are necessary, in order to entitle them to have their claims enforced as liens, and to participate in the proceeds of the sale of the…