Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1883-11-29

right to sell or convey the land to vii.
liam Banks or allow him to lease II.
Mr.. Cooper concluded bis argument
about III O'Clock, when Mr.. Spruanoe
commenced, aud continued nearly one
hour In opposition to the motion. He
also cited a number OF authorities and
read portion OF the will In support Of
his position and was followed by Mr..
Cooper, who endeavored to show that
even according to Mr.. Sprusnoe's argu-
ment he should be granted non-suit.
Ths court gave lengthy opinion ad-
verse to Mr.. Cooper. Mr.. Cooper then
commenced his argument to the Jury
and had mot concluded when court ad-
journed at O'Clock.
In 1.-THE afternoons session OF court
convened at 3 o'clock with Chief Justice
Coniegys aud Associate Judges Woo,ten
aud Houston on the bench,
The trial of the trespass case OF Clark
We. Banks aud Moody was r-snm-d, and
Mr.. Cooper commenced the xsioinalion
Of witnesses tor ibe d-isndnnt.
Edward McEa-lsrl letti6vd that when
CLARK Learned that Banks intended to
piow up the wheat field be came to him
aud complsined about ~, ana he epdeav-
hAFh ~ " utblels ut hlHD
aaid that the agreement with CLARK was
that he should SOW clover In the field, but
whsn the witness bought the seed and
sent 1t to Clark, he sent it back again,
and sad that he intended to pillow the
land and put 1t in wheat. The witness
had sold the farm, while Clark WAS a
tenant, to William Banks; he had never
given Clark permission to put the
field in wheat. There never was anything
but verbal agreement between the wit.
ness and Clark, but he had often wished
that he had a written lease there was
nothing in their verbal agreement that
would authorize Clark to break up the
ground in that field, aud when he learned
that he WAS preparing to do so, had
warned him not to; he told Clark that he
was willing 10 pay him the cost OF the
seed wheat he had done this to prevent
law suit, but Clark declined to accept it,
On oross-examinstion the witness said
that William Banks was his brother-in-
Law. He also said that when he heard
that Banks intended to have Moody
pillow up the wheat, he had asked him
not TO 40 1t, and finally offered to pay
him to let 1t alone.
Robert Mcfarland was sworn, and
testified that before Clark rented the
farm he was told that he could not put
that field in wheat, and 1t was intended
to put It in clover. When II was decided
to rent the farm, the rent was placed at
$500, but as Clark thought it wss too
much it WAS reduced to $3.50. The under
standing was that certain parts of the
farm were not to be titled, and the rent
u ruAnaad tluf Thu
witness knew the land was good,
as he had lived on the farm
himself for at least ten years there
was considerable blue grass on the place,
especially in that field that was planted
in wheat. Mr.. Clark was told not to put
wheat In that field, as it had already
been sowed in wheat twice; he, however,
sowed II again, but the witness did not
think 1t would have made good crop
he did not think at the time the wheat
was ploughed up it would have brought
more than ~ an acre.
William Banks was sworn and testified
that he owns the farm on which CLARK
lived he had told him MT TO put that
IL acre field iu wheat, but he went
ahead and planted it he undertook to
explain the conversation spoken of by
tue witness Mccoy, when Mr.. Spruanos
told him that he did not want speech,
aud he replied that he had been allowed
| to take an oath on the book to tell the
whole truth, aud he intended to tell 1t,
| He testified that he had no idea Of the
condition under which Clark had rented
the place when he boughtit.
Charles Megginson knew the farm and
| thought the wheat on the field
would not have brought more that So an
acre at public sale when Banks had il
| plowed up.
John r. Lyman was the last witness
examined, and he testified that MoFsr.
land had bought some clover seed from
which be had taken Clark, but upon his
refusing to receive it had taken 1t back
home again Clark said he intended t.
pillow the field up, and would not need
| the clover.
| When this witness left the stand, Mr.
Cooper said that h5 would likeiuntil next
morning to look over his notes, wher
Judge Wootten replied: "Yes, and ther
| you'll spend another day." but upon Mr.
Cooper stating that he would BIS able t
finish in little time, the court adjourned
until 10 O'Clock Wednesday morning.
Court proceedings are extremely dull
and az q consequence very few spectator
are in attendance. All the judges wer,
present yesterday, and Immediately
after the opening, argument was com
menoed in the trespass case OF Thomas T
4. Clark VS.. William Banks and JobI
Moody, by MIR. Spruanoe for the plaintiff
Alter consuming about an hour il
citing authorities and addressing thu
court he opened his argument to tn
jury. He oonteudsd that as the whes
was already planted before Clark re
ceived notice to move, it bsloDgs to him
and this gave him a perfet right at an.
time to come on the place aad gather IL
it was his property and no one else hsC
any right TO interfere with II.
Mr. Spruauos continued until after
O'Clock, when Mr.. Cooper bsesn hi
argument to the court. He said that
the tenant had right to return an,
gather a.y crop that he had planted, i
would virtually be giving him a lease {
s or IL months instead of one year. Ii
thought the right OF the tenant TO retur
and gather a crop must have limi
omewhsre, aud unless otherwise sgree
upon would cease upon the sSpir4t o. {
his lease.
Mr.. Cooper continued until l U'oloc
when the jury was discharged until
O'Clock in the afternoon and court ad
journed to the same time.