Windham v. Stephenson, 156 Ala. 344, 47 So. 280, 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 910, 130 Am. St. Rep. 102; Griffis v. Wilson, 18 Ala. App. 449, 92 So. 908. Amendment of the complaint, by adding counts for money had and received, was improperly allowed. Fraser v. R. W. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 783. Defendants should have been permitted to show that legal title to the land involved was in the Federal Land Bank. Sellers v. Hardaway, 188 Ala. 388, 66 So. 460; Gilliland v. Pond, 189 Ala. 542, 66 So. 480; Alexander v. Garland, 209 Ala. 267, 96 So. 138. Testimony to the effect that the tenant of plaintiffs' mortgagor had a lien on the cotton, and turned his part of it over to defendants, should have been admitted. Code 1907, § 4743; Beck v. Crow, 204 Ala. 295, 85 So. 489; Marlowe v. Rogers, 102 Ala. 510, 14 So. 790; Compton v. Sims, 209 Ala. 287, 96 So. 186; Willard v. Cox, 9 Ala. App. 439, 63 So. 781; Sivley Son v. Moore, 20 Ala. App. 269, 101 So. 513; Gay Bruce v. Smith Sons, 211 Ala. 358, 100 So. 634.

Ala. Construction Co. v. Watson, 158 Ala. 166, 48 So. 506. An amendment will not be allowed which will add a cause of action barred by the statute of limitations at the time of amendment. Fraser v. R. W. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782. A judgment against the master but exonerating the servant in a suit in which the master's liability is dependent upon the principle of respondeat superior for the acts of the servant exonerated is inconsistent and should be set aside. R. L. Turner Motors v. Hilkey, 260 Ala. 577, 72 So.2d 75. American Southern Ins. Co. v. Dime Taxi Service, Inc., 275 Ala. 51, 151 So.2d 783.

Tedescki v. Burger, 162 Ala. 534, 50 So. 150. Amendment will not be allowed which will authorize recovery upon cause of action accruing subsequent to institution of suit. Fraser v. R. W. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782; Mobile Life Ins. Co. v. Randall, 74 Ala. 170; Huggins v. Southern R. Co., 148 Ala. 153, 41 So. 856; Birmingham Gas Co. v. Sanford, 226 Ala. 129, 145 So. 485. Raising of pigs or hogs is a lawful business, and keeping thereof in hog ranches, piggeries or other places is not a nuisance per se even if it causes some annoyance in the locality.

A count for fraudulently procuring the extinguishment and loss of a claim cannot be added to a complaint for driving an automobile against a person. Robins v. Central of Georgia R. Co., supra; Ala. Consol. Coal Iron Co. v. Heald, 154 Ala. 580, 45 So. 686; Central of Georgia R. Co. v. Foshee, 125 Ala. 199, 27 So. 1006; Alabama Const. Co. v. Watson, 158 Ala. 166, 48 So. 506; Farmer v. Hill, 243 Ala. 543, 11 So.2d 160; Sullivan v. North Pratt Coal Co., 205 Ala. 56, 87 So. 804; Fraser v. R. W. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782; Richardson v. Hopkins, 218 Ala. 280, 118 So. 465; Ex parte North, 49 Ala. 385; Code 1940, Tit. 7, § 239; Rarden Mer. Co. v. Whitrside, 145 Ala. 617, 39 So. 576; Mobile L. I. Co. v. Randall, 74 Ala. 170; Mahan v. Smitherman, 71 Ala. 563, 565; Gambill v. Fox Typewriter Co., 190 Ala. 36, 66 So. 655; Gaines v. Birmingham R. L. P. Co., 164 Ala. 6, 51 So. 238; Spurling v. Fillingim, 244 Ala. 172, 12 So.2d 740. Chas. Douglass and L. Chandler Watson, Jr., Anniston, for appellee.

139 Ala. 578, 36 So. 707, 101 Am.St.Rep. 52; Sims Ch.Prac. 212; King v. Avery, 37 Ala. 169; Adams v. Phillips, 75 Ala. 461; Alabama Consol. Coal Iron Co. v. Heald, 154 Ala. 580, 45 So. 686; 38 C.J. 51; 34 Am.Jur. § 36; Fire Protection Co. v. Hawkeye Tire Rubber Co., 8 Cir., 8 F.2d 810, 45 A.L.R. 180; Hulen v. Chilcoat, 79 Neb. 595, 113 N.W. 122, 126 Am.St.Rep. 681. An amendment is not permitted which states another and distinct cause of action. 49 C.J. 507; 30 C.J. § 813; McCrory v. Guyton, 164 Ala. 365, 51 So. 312; Nelson v. First Nat. Bank, supra. An amendment is not allowable if its averments require proof of additional facts. 41 Am.Jur. 504; Kunselman v. Southern P. R. Co., 33 Ariz. 250, 263 P. 939; Allen v. Tuscarora Val. R. Co., 229 Pa. 97, 78 A. 34, 30 L.R.A., N.S., 1096, 140 Am.St.Rep. 714; 12 Words Phrases, Perm.Ed., 86. An amendment constitutes a departure from the original bill if it sets up matters barred by the limitations of actions. Nelson v. First Nat. Bank, supra; Fraser v. R. W. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782. An amendment must concern itself with the same transaction or contract that was set up and relied on in original bill. 49 C.J. 511; Garrett v. First Nat. Bank of Montgomery, 233 Ala. 467, 172 So. 611; King v. McAnnally, 234 Ala. 479, 175 So. 546.

A complaint cannot be amended by adding new or other causes of action and which do not refer to the same transaction, property and title, and parties as the original complaint, and which could not have been included in the original complaint. Code 1923, §§ 9467, 9513; Pearson v. Birmingham, 210 Ala. 296, 97 So. 916; Williams v. Ala. Cotton Oil Co., 152 Ala. 645, 44 So. 957; Fraser v. R. W. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782; Cox v. Awtry, 211 Ala. 356, 100 So. 337; Robins v. Central of Ga. Ry., 212 Ala. 596, 103 So. 672; Gulf Yellow Pine Co. v. Urkuhart, 151 Ala. 452, 44 So. 555. An action cannot lie for inducing a third person to break his contract with plaintiff, the consequence after all being only a broken contract for which the party to the contract may have his remedy by suing upon it. Erswell v. Ford, 208 Ala. 101, 94 So. 67; Pickens v. Hal J. Copeland Gro. Co., 219 Ala. 697, 123 So. 223; Dent v. Balch, 213 Ala. 311, 104 So. 651; 62 C. J. 1137; 37 C. J. 132, note 91, and cases cited. Eviction not under a title paramount cannot result from the trespasses or other acts of a stranger who acts independently of the landlord and without his authority or consent, however injuriously they may affect the tenant in his possession, use, or enjoyment of the premises, and any cause of action therefor belongs to tenant.

The mortgagee of a chattel is the owner thereof and entitled to the possession thereof even before the law day of the mortgage, in the absence of an express stipulation or a stipulation arising by implication from the terms and conditions of the mortgage, reserving in the mortgagee the right to possession until default in the payment of the debt. Phillips v. Hartselle, 17 Ala. App. 79, 81 So. 857; Houston Nat. Bank v. Edmonson, 200 Ala. 120, 75 So. 568; Fraser v. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782; Boswell v. Carlisle, 70 Ala. 244. Even though under the mortgage the mortgager is entitled to retain possession of the chattel, yet the right of possession in the mortgagor is a right personal to him, and, as against a third person, especially where the third person has obtained possession in violation of a statute, the mortgagee is reinvested with the right of possession. Phillips v. Hartselle, supra; Millar v. Allen, 10 R.I. 49; Whitney v. Lowell, 33 Me. 318; Kitchen v. Schuster, 14 N.M. 164, 89 P. 261; Bank of Commerce v. Gaskill, 44 Okl. 728, 145 P. 1131; Forbes v. Parker, 16 Pick. (Mass.) 462. James W. Strother, of Dadeville, for appellees.

460; Texas N. O. R. Co. v. Smith, 35 Tex. Civ. App. 351, 80 S.W. 247. If a new cause of action is set up in an amendment to the complaint, the amendment does not relate back to the filing of the original suit. Code 1923, § 9513; Fraser v. R. W. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782; White v. W. B. Bean Co., 16 Ala. App. 330, 77 So. 924; Haynes v. Phillips, 211 Ala. 37, 99 So. 356; Ala. Consol. Coal Iron Co. v. Heald, 154 Ala. 580, 45 So. 686. A wanton count merely alleging that defendant's agent acting within the line and scope of his employment with knowledge that he would likely and probably cause damage to plaintiff's property wantonly exploded dynamite in making an excavation in a public street is insufficient.

Under the statute of amendments of Alabama, the complaint may be amended by changing the Christian name of the party plaintiff so that the name of the plaintiff will read "Nelson Davis" instead of "Leon Davis," and the change is not a complete change of party plaintiff. Ewton v. McCracken, 9 Ala. App. 619, 64 So. 177; Beggs v. Wellman, 82 Ala. 391, 2 So. 877; Griel v. Solomon, 82 Ala. 85, 2 So. 322, 60 Am. Rep. 733; Smith v. Yearwood, 197 Ala. 680, 73 So. 384; Rosenberg v. Claflin Co., 95 Ala. 249, 10 So. 521; Manistee Mills Co. v. Hobdy, 165 Ala. 411, 51 So. 871, 138 Am. St. Rep. 73; Head v. Robinson, Norton Co., 191 Ala. 352, 67 So. 976; Birmingham I. D. Co. v. Hood, 19 Ala. App. 4, 94 So. 835; Lewis Lbr. Co. v. Camody, 137 Ala. 578, 35 So. 126; Fraser v. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782; Decatur L. F. Co. v. Newson, 179 Ala. 127, 59 So. 615; King Land Co. v. Bowen, 7 Ala. App. 462, 61 So. 22; Code 1923, §§ 9514, 9516; Casper v. Klippen, 61 Minn. 353, 63 N.W. 737, 52 Am. St. Rep. 604. L. H. Ellis, of Columbiana, for appellees.

Only debts for which an action of debt could be maintained against the garnishee can be the subject of condemnation against the garnishee. Dishman v. Griffis, 198 Ala. 664, 73 So. 966; Steiner v. First Nat. Bank, 115 Ala. 379, 22 So. 30; Cross v. Spillman, 93 Ala. 170, 9 So. 362; Roman v. Montgomery Iron Works, 156 Ala. 604, 47 So. 136, 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 604, 130 Am. St. Rep. 106; Jefferson County Sav. Bank v. Nathan, 138 Ala. 342, 35 So. 355; Feore v. Miss. Tr. Co., 161 Ala. 567, 49 So. 871; Grand Lodge v. Harrison, 5 Ala. App. 373, 59 So. 307; American Tr. Sav. Bank v. O'Barr, 12 Ala. App. 546, 67 So. 794; Pettus v. Dudler Bar Co., 218 Ala. 163, 118 So. 153; Code 1923, § 9513; Fraser v. Allen Co., 19 Ala. App. 55, 94 So. 782; Cox v. Thomas, 216 Ala. 282, 113 So. 261. ANDERSON, C. J.