, 1875-02-17
FArved payments. Ths coulrat! waa dated Jnna q,
1919, k0I tha Ab4ttact Of tte was aoon after fur

f.rFed payments, Tns contract waa dated lima q, |
1870, kDI tho abatract Of tHs was aoou after FUR
An attorney Was consulted, and ha pronounced this
t!ts Food Tbersupon .rpe!ess r,i =. various tmss @
IN . e M s q sS On s IL! Ins
Ler Of the organization --..-. |
Nor nEiNa aArisrtED WITH TIE TITLE.
had Il e1anined by Noaenthat h rence, who dtcidea
tho rrrerty was absct to Tho isn ot decree VI
81 co. Tie vendors wers Informed Of ths fart, aud
Noes w. sssn to Ro.sntI r.s. BY @ sns.
,,nsss payments were made aecnrdins 10 ths terms Of
o s sea s T. xs1 sss s;ss IL. e
ti,Ie III fea % .ppsllea complying with tasr ennsrac
tract enJeu on account Of the lien os lin decree.
AN ACTION WAa nRouHHT
y s I Id
which defendants have apnesrd to th's Court,
r1spsty, .oia r ienes nd wfs to .rp.'lee'. E.nea
Ra oa y H. shs1 I'D s 10 srpse
mi to This portion Of tho property. no other ob-
'soa.a 'ss,sa lin e Ss deere, 70 III
that Gage and others wsrs Indebted 10 Lawrence
IN the sum Of ISL and they wers ordesod to pay
involved ia that sst should bs sold by tho Ma"sernnA
II It failed to produce .otn suflc3ent 10 iay tho ds-
1904 {sess Laws p. 3Gl
WAS THIS n.onEH A LIEN
ths property Of Eanes and ufs at sha tis Of tho
n,le7 The fourteenth .e.aon Of tho chapter entitled
mchsnss1y s ;ss l.w' I'll ta,' sa for or
:Io IL SAN. % s,tsnt md uad3r ,ao ,,, same iim!!a.
s1s s.sssr Il wios q par h.ss
cannot he controyertcd. II hnds specific to le
81 s IF ths s m
paI the decree, 1t awarss general e1eoution
Ah w. s1aS be i
Of money, and for the performance Of other act
aud tho sa!a Of tho Epcsi1o property is but
eei ws It he1s w. en ss aee.sa %
bccsnae lion on the property Of tho defendants,
at law rendered by the Court Uuiar attach
ncnt Laws when shers Is service or appearance, tbs
a 7 s = e ssh.9a
anee, and in sueh ono would doubt tia. tue
etle1 md this lecroe Is In all essential features
THE KAME Az SUCH a JUDGMENT.
We a5e clearly of tue opinion that thta decree b.
,i.ou But only continued 10 be Lien for ona year
sued out within that time under the Decree And this
record fails to show that such m execution
dered the 17h Of juno. 1863, and atirmed at lilo
gertembcr tcrm Of thts Court Of the samo year. 50
+. S .nseoa h19 could 9Ag .ys s1 hsa e
after the decree was affirmed. and nore than
a year hefors the contract waa entered into tY
Eamcs for tho sails Of tho anI which bears dnte Oh
the 9th Of June, 1a0 and tho se{nsal by the arpcecs
to PROCEED under tho agreement sorne time Inter.
The fourteenth section OF the ChAncery code In
poses tho same reatTctlons on the lion Of monoY de-
cree that arc imposed Judgment at law, and the
lien Of 4 Judgment only co,iuues ono year, unless
execution is sued out before tha expiration Of that
t!me, snd atlch dccTGa this by tho ters OF tho
statute Is under Tho same limitation.
Ne refegel 70 the act ef 1866 in appeilees ar
gment: but thu title Of the act iis date OF the page
Of the volume, when fund, IL not given. Wa have
turned 10 the laws Of that eehsfon and mud tbs act Of
Fob. 10, laI6 80. which presume is tht to
which reference IL made. 1t provides that In fare.
closing mortgages, tue Court may feucr decree for
the balance eePse what aaii be paid by sAla af Tue
mors8aged prtletty. cpndltton4llY At tha rendition
thereaf absolutely nftcr tho sale OF The property and
collection Of tho This kocton undoubtedly
thorizpd money decree in tho case, lt 1t in wise
haa any bearing the lien. Huch decree should bo
OIL other property than the mortEaged promises.
As what u not shown Ia presumed Aot tG exist. no
must conclude that no execution ever iaaucd OH
the decrce, md II not, Then
IT WAS NOT 4 LIEN
on this property Of EAues aud wife Nhen ao1d, and
that is the only objection urged against their ttte md
no4s is urged nrainAt Latins 1t then folIowa that
aprtees hnd no right to refuse to proceed with ths
ftldlment Of thctr agreement to purchase, and, a.
appellants were not in default On their
part. Arpelless had no right to reacind
Having failed to ehow that this decree was subaisng
tsn 1t tho tns Of sac the portion OF the property
sold BY Eanes sppaees haye failed to show right to
recover and tha Judgment Of tho Court below Ii ro-
yersed and tins cauko remandsd.
Ae.sfs seeps1 Wilton appeared for tho eppsllees.