The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 1850-1873, 1872-10-11

CMAHCuDxDDUnnlensxsL
RslassS-Wh1rLnY -. CHAPLAIN.
Hidden sold tract or land In 0ilsu
county. 10 oumplalnAnt, Whitley. and
executed to him bond for title, upon
payment Of the confederation money.
Whitley afterwards Transferred said
title bond b. delivery, to one Seriokland,
taking his note or notes consideration
for the saue; and, Aterwards, 6trick-
land, In like maun8t, trausferred said
bond to defendant, Chapman. 3
The purchase money was all paid by
Whitley TO Higden, the original vendor,
and Strickland paid to Whitley the
notes executed BY him, except 9 bal
lam. And now Whitley files his Bill
against Chapman to enforce his sup
posed vendors lien against the land, for
said unpaid balance. Il ID propar to
state that, some time before me Bill was
dled, Chapman presented to Higden,
the original vendor, said bond Tor title.
when Higden executed to him deed
for the land The answer Of Chapman
denies tho right Of whitley to any lien
upon said land, admitting the facts to
be - above stated And now, the only
question presented fof tho consideration
Of the Court, n, whether whitley, by .
transfer and delivery Of the title bond
Of Higden, to Strickland, acquired any
lien - vendor to said land, 90 - to fol-
low It into the hands Of subsequent
vendee, and enforce his lien upon said
land.
without discussing the general sub
jet Of the lien Of vendors ofland, which
the legal profession, We proceed at once
to the principles which must govern this
case. It II conceded that Higden, the
original vendor, having made his title
bond to Whitley, would have . lien up
on said land for the payment Of tho pur-
chase money, no matter how often the
said land might bo sold.
It II also admitted thai, If Whitley
had sold said land, and executed bond
for title, and took notes for the purchase
money, he would have his lien upon the
land, no matter into whose ha1ds 1t
may, afterwards, have passed. These
principles are well settled by numerous
authorities. 80
But the direct question Is, did Whit
ley, by . delivery Of the title bond of
Higden to Strickland, sell him the land,
or did he merely sell him the eQwity of
nnon his titia hondS Tfhe Whitiav "a
hefnre statad had add the Land to
Strick,and then No anheecnent am
vevance conld defeat h;s lien Rut. in
ths oninion n the Cont he mada no
sale of the Land. Init simnlv of the con-
tract a aoainst Hioden. In other
words he Mace Strick land In his shoes
he nasses to him ali the eon;.v he No.
saesad auainet Hivdan ard til. vas .
ri0ht tn enforce :. Scainst him snacif,c
nerformsncc Of his c6ntrsct and cpmnei
him, Hicien' to make title. or to hrIno
his action At common lac IN the hond
It is - if Whitlev ha6 aid to stricr.
land 81 do not seH Won this mn ANA
bind mveelf to ,nnke voM a t;He~hnt
do eell Won vhstaver r,1kts And eo,.;fies
NV shoes nndsr this contysct =. cmhod.
ia IN Hioden,. tit,s hond. 90" nav
iook tn him m h;s covenants. Won ma
comnel him nv RilI in emit to ns;.
form HI. contrsct hv NATIVE z dead az
Won NAV ana him af Law IN his bond Tor
isiinre ar rsfnsal to comniv With tha
terma and conditions # his hond'n
Nov this IL All. in tbe oninion of the
Court. Chat a mere tronafer b. delsveyv
Of the bond conid imnort. And here
Va take u. IN the tYne distinction he,
tveen this casa And that NJ D;rSmore On
Jores i Cold r K5i In thai casa the
Art vendee soIT ~ lnnd ~ .tated IN
the oninion nj the Court takin~ the
notes of his vandee wh;ch wara frans.
ferred to comnisinants' The Cont
held that the notes ware n i;en IN the
land. and snstained the R;Ii And Sbe
anrhoritv Of tha casa IL fnIiv recoonizo
ed. But In that Gaze the partv sold The
land and Va mnst infe, ftha xcts ha;n~
mea9erlv reportedI that he crecxted q
bond to make title. Otherwise II is not
vsrv snnsrent that he comld seu = Tn
thi: ca.e there Wa no ssIe of IRE Innd
And hence the distinction We have ia,
kan vhtch NAV seem too ref;ned vat
"a beIieve to be sonnd and tensble
And to test the vaiiditv and
soundness of the nosition wa MIGHT
AK. could Strickland maintain snv
action AGAINST whitley Sor AM
breach of Contract. in failing to make
a fitie tn the Iand1 No. Wh;tIav