Boone

(after stating the facts as above).

Error is assigned to the ruling of the court below that the proceedings in cause 667A were valid as against Smallwood, and that the decree therein and proceedings thereunder divested Smallwood of title to the property in controversy.

*757 As the plaintiff could recover in ejectment only upon proof of title or right of possession in him, it was incumbent upon him to show not only that he received a conveyance from Smallwood, but that at the date of such conveyance Smallwood’s interest in the property had not been divested by the decree of foreclosure rendered against him on December 8, 1908, and the proceedings following thereupon.

It is contended that the decree was rendered without jurisdiction of the defendant Smallwood, in that first, the published summons was fatally defective; and, second, there was no proof before the court of the mailing of a copy of the summons and the complaint to said defendant. It is said that the published summons did not comply with the statute, in that it did not state the time when the defendant was required to appear. The judgment roll in the foreclosure suit shows that Smallwood was a nonresident of Alaska,…