This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1905 Excerpt: ... that plaintiff had entered said land, and the defendant thereupon informed plaintiff that he proposed to enter a contest for said forty acres upon which he resided, and the 7laintiff thereupon assured defendant that he did not want defendant's land and home, and did not enter it for the purpose of depriving defendant ...
Read More
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1905 Excerpt: ... that plaintiff had entered said land, and the defendant thereupon informed plaintiff that he proposed to enter a contest for said forty acres upon which he resided, and the 7laintiff thereupon assured defendant that he did not want defendant's land and home, and did not enter it for the purpose of depriving defendant of the same; that defendant might rest easy and satisfied because he should never be deprived of the land; that he remembered that all four of the parties before named had gone together to purchase the 160 acres of land together, and that he did not intend to take advantage of defendant by depriving him of his forty after they bad all supposed that defendant had a good title thereto; that if a contest was entered for that forty it might affect the plaintiff's right to consummate his entry to the other forty; that he would perfect his right to the whole eighty acres and then convey to defendant his forty, the defendant to pay half of the expenses of obtaining a patent to the land; that said plaintiff further represented to the defendant that he should never be put to any trouble about his forty under the said entry; that he knew he had no moral or legal right to the land in dispute as against defendant, and that defendant should never be dispossessed of his forty, and that plaintiff woulddo right and tote fair with defendant; that the patent which he might obtain should never Smith v. Love--Opinion of Court be used to dispossess the defendant; that at the time he entered the land he did not know it was the defendant's land, but supposed it was the land of Burton Hunter, aforesaid; that had he known that the land was that of defendant he would not have entered it; that it would be necessary for plaintiff and defendant to make quit-claim deeds ba...
Read Less