The name of the person for whom the threshing was done must be entered in the lien. Schatz v. Kintyre Farmers Co-op. Elevator Co. 52 N.D. 290, 202 N.W. 855. CHRISTIANSON, Ch. J.

"The filing of a lien, regular on its face, does not alone suffice to secure the benefits of the lien in a contested case." Martin v. Hawthorn, 3 N.D. 412, 57 N.W. 87; Auth v. Kuroki Elevator Co. 40 N.D. 533, 169 N.W. 80; Schatz v. Kintyre Farmers Co-op. Elevator Co. 52 N.D. 290, 202 N.W. 855; Brodina v. Vranek, 50 N.D. 420, 196 N.W. 311. BURR, J.

Section 3338. On the other hand, the only record of chattel mortgages that is made is the alphabetical index provided for by section 6765, Comp. Laws 1913; Schatz v. Kintyre Farmers Co-op. Elevator Co. 52 N.D. 290, 202 N.W. 855. This distinction between filing and recording and filing and indexing is expressly recognized in § 3340, which provides that §§ 3336, 3337, 3338 and 3339, "shall not be construed to extend to or cover the filing and indexing of chattel mortgages." And this distinction is in accord with that generally made by the authorities.

We believe it is the contemplation of the recording statutes, with respect to docketing judgments, that the docket thereof shall impart notice to the eye and not to the ear; and that it is incumbent upon him who would obtain the benefit of the constructive notice imparted under the recording laws to see that his judgment is entered and docketed against the proper person and by his correct name. In the case of Schatz v. Kintyre Farmers' Co-op. Elevator Co. 52 N.D. 290, 202 N.W. 855, this court quotes with approval from Heil's Appeal, 40 Pa. 453, 80 Am. Dec. 590, as follows: "Upon this second question no light is thrown by the fact that the name of the debtor, though spelled with different capitals, is the same in sound. The act of assembly, which requires that judgment dockets and indexes shall be kept, provides for notice to the eye, not to the ear.