Daily clarion and standard. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1866-1866, 1866-06-20
ERRORS MD APPEALS.
AT THE APRIL TERM, 1866.
Reported Expressly for the mississippi
Clarion and standard
CONCLUDED. |

The general principles that regulate tn,
discretion of a court of equity, when tn,
specific performance of contract is claim
ed, are plain and simple Ordinarily in the
case, the Court will not interfere to de
cree a specific delivery, because by a suit al
law, full compensation may be obtained il
damages, although the thing itself cannot be
specifically obtained and where such q
| remedy at law is perfectly adequate and eff
! fectual to redress the injury, there is no rea.
son why courts of equity should afford any
| aid to the party. The rule is illustrated by
stating the exceptions to it, and these al
| ways depend upon peculiar circumstances
| as where the thing is of peculiar value and
| Importance, and the loss of it cannot be com
| pensated in damages, or where some other
| ingredient of equity jurisdiction is mixed
| up in the transaction. Various eases are put
| i'll the books, in which this jurisdiction has
| been exercised from the cases of the Pusey
horn and the Duke of SOmerset's alter piece
| down to that of the maidstone, with the ro-
| mantle legend recorded by Judge CLAYTON in
| Murphy VS.. Clark; but all of them turned
| upon some pretiHm dfectiOais, or other pecu-
| liar circumstances, to take them out of the
| admitted general rule. In regard to con-
! tracts respecting personal estate, it is gener-
| ally true that no particular value or pecu-
| liar value is attached to any one thing over
another of the same kind and that n com
pensation IN damages meets the full merits
as well as the full objects, of the contracts
If man contracts for the purchase of a
hundred bales of cotton, or boxes of sugar.
or bags of coffee, of a particular description
or quality, if the contract is not specifically
performed, he may generally, with a sum
equal to the market price, purchase other
goods OF like description and quality: and
thus completely obtain his object and in
demnlfy himself against loss. , Story Ed
sec. 7O1, 100, 40 and 746; 3 Persons on Con,
364; Wizards Eq. Ju., POS, 27I; | Leading
cases in Equity, $50 to 534; Notes to the
eases Cudder VS.. Rutter, Pusey VS. Pusev
and Duke of Somerset VS.. Cookson.
Ii Is altogether immaterial whether there
was sale of certain specific bales of cotton
or an agreement to sell and deliver a certain
number of bales, without any designation
OF the specific bales, or of the particular 2ot
out of which they are to come All such
cases depend upon the same general princi-
pie. The rule Is not to entertain iurisdic-
ton IN equity for specific performance of
agreements respecting goods, chattels stock
chooses IN action, and other things of a per
sonal nature, unless under the particular cir
cumstances of the case, there can be no ade-
quate compensation in damages at law:
Story Eq. Ju, 5. III, III, and Ills. Difficulty
sometimes occur in the application of the rule.
whether the circumstances of a particular
case will exempt it from its operation.-
And equity writer's and judges are often dis
posed to enlarge their jurisdiction beyond
its proper limits. But there can be no diff
Guilty in the case like the present if the
general principles be admitted. In this
State it seems to be fully established The
right TO go into chaneery TO obtain the spe-
eItie delivery of slaves, was expressly put
upon the pretiHm afectiORis, and the peculiar
nature and character of the property and
since that right was established. this Court
has clearly recognized the rule that a court
of equity cannot take jurisdiction in cases
of personal property, where there is an ade-
quate remedy at law. HAY VS.. Hansbor-
ough Freeman CHI. r. s., 43. Murphy VS.
Clark, 5. & NJ. 235. Butler VS.. Hicks, IL S !
& NJ, So Eehols VS. Hanomaund, 30 Miss, |
III. Brown vs. Bank of Miss, 81 Miss 454 |
Brown VS.. Seoldsby. "a Miss, 49,
But 1t is argued that if the appellee is not 1
entitled 20 decree for specific performance |
he IS entitled to a. decree for the value of the /
property; and this is claimed first under the l
general principles of equity jurisprudence |
and secondly Independently of such prinei-
pies, by force OF the amended orexplanatorv /
order of the Provisional Governor
We do not think pretension can be sup-
ported upon either ground Courts of equi.
ty do not entertain Jurisdiction to give re.
dress by way of compensation or damages
for breaches of contracts, or other WRONGS
where these are the sole objects of the bill
Such relief is only decreed where it is in
eidental TO the relief sought by the bill, and
granted by the Court; or where there is no |
adequate remedy at law; or where some ne.
culiar equity intervenes- Wherever com
pensation or damages are incidental to Other
relief, as for instances where specific per
Torrance is decreed upon the application Of
either party, with an allowance TO be made
for any deficiency as TO the quantity, ouaI.
ity,, or description of the property, or for
any delay in performing the contract, there
it seems clear that the Jurisdiction pToperlr
attaches in equity; for it flows and is insen-
arabic from the proper relief But where
specific performance is denied such eompen-
sation or damages do not seem to be allowed !