Juniata sentinel. [volume] (Mifflintown, Pa.) 1846-1873, 1871-02-15

busy day. ano gathered together as largt
a concourse of people as any day of The
I term This was owing to the large list o.
valuable properties to be sold by th.
Sheriff. Fifteen deeds were acknowl
, edged, embracing the sales actually made
Other writs were stayed. The bid ling
was sharp, spirited. and excited consid,
erable interest. The real estate Of acot
Dimm, Of Greenwood township, fhi.
county, was sold-the bulk of it 70 Doty
Parker Il CO., of this place
Judge Graham was on the ground
early, having come on the emigranttrain
Owing to his early arrival, the lack Of
miscellaneous business,- and the Srevity oi
the argument list, case vas, taken up
and tried on Monday evening. namely,
Bronson; Graves, Selover s. Cows. David
Adams This was an action brought to
, recover amount of bill for fruit trees sold
by plaintiffs to defendant. The deft al:
legged that the trees were otsof the quail
ity and description that he had ordered,
and, therefore. he refused to take them,
There is prejudice whether rcasona-
bic or not we do not. say-among the
citizens of this county against all bum
mers for fruit tree firms and sharp. bar.
gain driving patent-right dealers. They
are regarded with suspicion and pre-
sumed cheats unlers they can establish
their integrity and faif-dealing by an.
questionable evidence. No such proof
being made in this case, verdict was rem
dered for deft.
- David Crea vs. Noah kertzler & Col
Ter Wix-This was an action of eject
ment brou ght to recover the possession of
and to try the title to a lot Of ground,
with warehouse thereon erected, in Per-
rysville, this county. r. Crea and Hertzler
both claimed under Gideon d. Thomas.
Wix was an employee of Ilertzler in
possession. Crea showed a conveyance
| from Thomas to Charles T. Lnthurst,
and from Linthurst to himself. Hertzler
alleged that the property was bought
from Thomas for partnership purposes by
him aud Linthurst together; that there
was an agreement of sale in writing, now
lost. between Thomas on the one part
and him and Linthurst on the other that
he, H., paid 5000 ON the purchase money,
and l.. $500, and that he, H., gave l..
credit on his account with L., for all the
money he, L paid; that l. by means Of
misrepresentation made to Thomas, pro
cured the deed in his own name, instead
of their joint names plff, claimed that
l.. had not received credit for the $500
paid by him. aud that l.. and II. we've
not trustees but tenants in common, their
several interests corresponding to The
amount of purchase money paid by each
-Lnthursl's being tenths and Hertz
Ter 2-tenths that Cres being an inno-
cent purchaser for value was not affect
ed by HIS equities. Def. contended
contra-lst That having brought home
to plf knowledge of Herlzler's being in
possession, he was bonnd 10 inquire what
H's interest was, and, having neglected
to do 80. was concluded by bis own iaches.
! 2nd That Ii & l. were partners. and,
boing partners, it mattered not what, pro
portion of the purchase money each paid,
as each would own an undivided half
3rd That if the jury should believe that
II & l. were tenants in common, each
awning interest in proportion to the
amount of purchase money paid by each,
then in that event, H., having given l..
credit for all the purchase money paid by
him, by that credit II. would really have
paid all the consideration money himself.
and would be the owner of the whole
lot. As matter of law it was held that
Crea, knowing that Eertzler was in pos
session, was not an innocent purchaser
The jury found that H & l.. were part
ners. and that plf recover the undivided
moiety of the ground described in the
writ .asf s.
John Vanormer vs. Emanuel We.zler
and wife-Replevin was brought in this
case by plf to recover two horses, one
wagon and horse gears, valued at 500,
distrained upon by Sheriff Die,rick un-
der warrant placed in his hands by Mrs
Sarah Wetzler, late Mrs. Hamilton. wild
ow of Samuel Hamilton, deceased, to
collect the annual interest, due her Feb
l, 1870, for the year previous. Plf
showed that deft. was living on the land
during the time when said interest ac
crued and received the products of the
land the value of which was proved
The amount claimed by the widow was
Sz2l.44; the verdict of the jury was
S45 rent in arrear. -er t+.'
Jacob Spade vs. Jeremiah Bruner and
William Carl.-Philip Spade recovered
judgment before Justice Leight, of
Susquekanna township, against Jacob
Spade and Jacob Umholtz, which judg.
ment was assigned to William Carl
After Justice Leight's term of office cx-
pired a scire facias was issued by JUS
tice Reed. of Greenwood township. on,
transcript of this Judgment, certified
from Justice Leight's docket, and judg
ment revived and re entered against
s, IL Z, On the second Judgment exc
cution was issued and placed in the
hands of jeremiah Bruner, one of the
defendants, constable of Delaware town.
ship, who in company with Carl, the
other defendant, went 10 the place where
S. & U. resided together for the purpose
of making levy. S & Y. claimed the
benefit of the $500 exemption law. Ap-
praisers were selected and the property
appraised. On footing up the appraise-
ment, it amounted to S347. Then Spade
&, Umholtz each claimed $500, making
500 tor both. This was refused, and a
wagon and several other articles apprais
ed at SAT, leaving balance of $500,
were seized and sold, To recover the |
value of the the wagon so soli, this ac
ton of trespass de bonis asportatis was
hrnnph Shade the Milf alleged that