Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1860-12-27

dry parts Of the correspondence fled Of record he ex
pressed the belief that the offensive charges proceeded
from the hGsty convictions of passionate mind under
the deusiOn OF error.
Il results therefore, that the offensive charges did not
spring from malice aRy wicked design falsely TO as
perse or ipure the plaintiff This being it is case for
explanation and nothing has prevented It's termination N
that way but difficulties growing out OF certain notions
of etiquette which should longer interpose their I'M
pediments Whether the deed does In TACT import gen
eral warranty is exceedingly doubtful question: and
lawyers have expressed different opinions upon it. And
whatever be its true legal plainly appears
from the correspondence already referred to, that the
plaintiff did not design it to have that effect
II seems 10 me that the covenant inserted on the part
of the trustees that they had good right TO convey,
,ictv interpreted subjects them to the liability Of
king good the title against the claim Of dover on the
mart OF the grantor Of the deed Of trust under which the
land was sold; and yet this is consequence not con-
| templated by them and not intended by the plalnun
when he wrote the deed and it is probable that the COW
enant against ncumbrance inserted on the part oil JOhn
GUSTS was only intended security against the asser-
ton of any claim to subject the land thereafter for any
part OF the original purchase money that might remain
unpaid after the appropriation OF the purchase money
obtained from W. H. Pitts There is in fact no defect OF
title to the land liable to sale for the purchase
money aud the widow Of the purchaser was only dowa-
BILE of the excess Of the proceeds OF SALE after deirayng
the costs OF sale and the payment OF the purchase mo-
ney when In fact the proceeds OF sale fell short oil
meeting these liabilities In TINS state Oh tue case,
all that is necessary to bring the parties TO an ami
cable settlement of the matters in controversy, is TO
bring them to personal acknowledgment TO each other
| of established facts. To remove the embarrassment
which the estranged and excited feelings oil the parties
produces propose that in consideration Of the premises
the defendant withdraw his pleas OF justification, and re-
rsct the offensive charges contained in his letter. that
the suit be dismissed his costs and that the pleas OF
justification the correspondence and the dispositions on
both sides bewthdrawn from file and destroyed In fact,
the plaintiff has sustained actual injury from the nu-
rous imputaions he has been recently elected by
increased majority to the Judicial office, and the defend
ant was not moved to the impuLaons by false or
malicious motives that both elements are wanting in
the case necessary TO authorize jury to award exem-
pary damages aud il il were otherwise, the plaintiff dis
Gains any desire make gain out of the controversy.
IL seems TO me- therefore, that the terms proposed
such rs embody settlement to which both parties can
honorably aceede.
If the plaintiff will signify his assent to this form Of
settlement by note that effect written at the foot OF
this memorandum the defendant will do the same, and
the whole can be filed in the cause as evidence Of this
arrangement of the matters in controversy between them
Dec. 9th, 1860 K. L. SCOTT.
Regarding the above terms fsetement as salisisotc-
nv, | accept and agree to the same. +. 7. PITTS.
Dee. 9th, 1850.
concur in the settlement as satisfactory to me.
Dec. 9th, 1860. JAS. W. GUSTS.