M'arthur Democrat. (McArthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1853-1865, 1863-04-09

William Bray,
Gsurge W. Johrston1
J0SEPH llANEN, Of Washington county ~
eJ the State ol Pennsylvania, viii take uollce
mat George Barnet OF tie County Of Nintoa in
the State OF UhiO, did, un the ls.h Of Feburary
1868, ii'c his Petition, in the Clerks OiEca Of the
atorcsald Court OF Common Please, within aud
for said Niuton county, against said Joseph
Hanen, William Brpy and George W. Johnston,
-, partners trading under tho firm, name Of ua-
nen. Bray So, defendants setting forth among
other things;
First. That abeut the 21lh. day Of December
1882, the said ticfsndcnts were dealcrS in sheep,
tnat they brought them into the neiehborhuud
OF The plaintiff In Harrison Up, IL said Vim.
ton county, That they offered for sale part OF
said sheep to plaintiff, ihat lhe said Bray aud
llancn, were present, aud that suid drtcndentS
uy said Bray aud llanea, represented TO the
plaintiff that said sheep were thorough bred
Spanirh sheep, Brought directly from Washing
ton county PENNSYLVANIA that the grown sheep
OF the dock were worth twenty dollars per head
that they were OF tho best quality OF sheep
known, that they would shear lrum six To teil
b.. OF wool annually that SoHe of them bad
yielded ten ibg. OF wool the previous spring.
the growth vi single year, a. SniI llanen and
Bray, personally knew. That they we're soui.d,
llee from disease &c. That plainufwas igaor.
ant Of tue bred quality, s,andness' age aud
condition OF said sh,cP, and relied wholly upon
tho representations uftne said Bray aud llaneu.
I That lduintitf agreed to buy htty head ofsaid
sheep, and agreed to pay, 10 the said llanen,
Bray X Co. and gave his ohli gatiOls herotor.
four hundred b. of WOOL per aunum On the lsl
day Of uly in each Of the years 1865, 1854, 1865
1856 aud 1867. That it plHinitl became diSSai-
iShed that said delenlentS were to take back
said sheep aud cancel hrs said Hye Obligations
gwen ae aforesaid, that the first OF SaiG uOligL-
~ Uns WAS drawn for 400 lbs Of wool due July
lst lS62 but that tic Nlorc said obligations were
lrnudulently drawn for 4ID lbs. OF wool each,
instead OF 4Jb lbs. rs agreed upon
That Hli Of said representations aS to breed,
quu.lty, stock, yield, ya,uc AMI sOUudne:- oi
suuvp were lH'e and Fraudulent and cUhtrived
10 cara. aud lotraud the plaintiff, and that de-
iendc.t> we'll knew Tie same u he false aud
fraudulent, tuaJ said sheep were not spanish,
wGu Il MT shear. from ,X to ton ID, pf WOOL AN
ualiy. were ~, sound Sc ThIJ pun ~ .Ques.
lvd uclcudcnis to .ake back sail .Acop amt edn
~, SAlu ob lyatlou> sc.
hty oaIu ilaG.n. IaGra~'ica. Of ths S'a'c Of
Penny 4niu, hat, said 60 gallons ure in pos
session SAID bray, that r4!d pt"!nIlii ha b.tn
and ls NJ .LauXprn,c Of Keeping said III rp at u
cost ufuol less tneA suVCniy-.INO els per DAY &c.
Second That the sali devadentS Ut the
same time ana place, further intending 10 chca,
..nl do.Taud the plaintiff under like hlse ana
fraudulent. representations, pstO breed stock,
vaIuo, annual yield Of wool, etc. procured the
plaintiff to enter into contact to keep fifty
head Of said sheep for the Pelhed Of i,c years,
On shares, OF same breed and quality, that the
same were To 5o not over three years Of age. Il
like number ut the end OF the term to be return
ed To detcndents, ana besides plaintiff in the
mean time WAS 10 deliver to detendeutS on the
l,t day of duly 1863, one huuired lbs OF wool on
the lst day ot July ls64, two hundred lbs Uf
wool, on the lst day Ot July 1868, one hundred
ANA tily ID, Of wool on the LIST day Oi July 1906,
one hundred and iitty lbs wool; AMI on the l,t
day OF Juy 1857, one hundred and fifty lbs Of
wool. Tnatif tbs plain,ilf became dissatisfied
said defendants were TO recind rald contract,
that plaintiff was ignorant Us to quality, brcoG,
vulue. yield and sUunlnrs, OF said sheep received
the same, and gave his obligations for the de-
livery VI said wool 10 deiendents, at times an
in amounts rs stated, that tho representations
Of letendUnLs were ialSe and fraudulent AS they
knew, that sheep were unSUund, would not yield
wool ~ repre- sented etc. lbat pl0intih senl u
messenger ~ said Bray requesting him toInkc
back SAID sheep, and deliver up aforesaid ubhgi-
tiUus to the said plaintiff that said Bray, rcius-
ed 50 tV do. that said obligations are still in tbs
ldnls Shu DIhl lIAI lllc hccpllR VI Sdll III y
head OF sheep is worth seventy lNo ct, per day
| from the 27th day Of December loj5, winch said
petition contain, Prayer.
That the said delcndents and each Of then
m.y b. enjoinel from assigning transferring ol
III any manner di,po,cing OF sud Obligations ol
any or either OF them. that On thJ mn Il hearing
ut this cause the Court may order aad decree
that bOtn OF said contracts may b. Cancelled
aud declared Of no effect, that the deicndcnu
may bo compelled ~ deliver up all of aforcSui,
Obligations, TO take oack both said lots Of sEecl
aud pay the plaintiff for Keeping same, not lea
lhaN sevenry-tivo cts per day. for cacn sal,
lots ofaheep. that the pIaintif be discharge,
from all the obligations Of said contracts, an,
that he be restored to all he has lost by reusol
thereof, and such other relict Us may be accord
| ng tn e?uiy
| Aud SAID defendants will t.ko notice that N,
| injunction has been allowed in this cau,o.
| McGIintick, S Smith GEORGE BARNET,
\ Bmttor, urt'ys for Plln. Feb 2dth 6S Nv