The Portland daily press., 1891-04-11
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.

The clerk Of courts received yesterday the
following decisions from the law court. The
rescripts are by Chief Justice Peters:
ANDRosCoGGIN COUNTY.
Edward W. Gross ct al, VS.. w. B. Jor
dan.
Rescript-Writing an agreement in the
form of lease does not alter the character
of an instrument which by its more essential
terms discloses itself to be a conditional sale
of personal property.
As the statutes of Massachusetts, allow the
redemption of a conditional sale of personal
property In the same manner that mortgages
of personal property are redeemable, that
provision becomes part of all such con-
tracts made in that Commonwealth, and is
entitled to enforcement in this state when
the contract is to be executed here.
As our own remedies are to be applied In
litigations here, it follows that, If property
thus cOnditiOnally sold in Massachusetts Is
attached in this state as belonging to the ven-
dee, the vender or his assignee. before he can
maintain replevin therefor against the at
taching officer, must notify the officer of his
claim and the amount due upon it as required
by X. S., CHI. 81, sec. A.
Exceptions overruled.
WALDO COUNTY.
Nancy P. Linscott ct al. VS.. John S. Lins-
ReScTipt The law requires great caution
to be observed in accepting oral evidence to
effect the alteration of such important instrU-
ments as deeds, especially when the testfmo.
ny comes from parties and persons in close
affinity with them: and the evidence to pre-
vail should be clear and strong, satisfactory
and conclusive.
The proof falls short of the required
standard, when the allegation is that deed,
made In 1868, omitted by mistake to include
two parcels of land that were bargained for
with those conveyed, the complainant and
her husband asserting that they did not dis
cover the mistake until lately, although the
deed was read over to them at its date, and
although some years ago, 1t was ascertained
that the deed included parcel that was not
intended to be conveyed, mistake that was
corrected by reconveyance for a CON-
slderati0n paid for 1t; it further appearing
that the circumstances favoring the COM
plainants contention are no stronger than
mony0n the two sides is equally positive,
that for the complainant being greater in
amount, but Of no greater weight or proba-
6lllty that the testimony produced by the
defendant.
Bill dismissed with costs.
OXFORD COUNTY.
Ebenezer Z. Chapman ct al VS.. Jedediah
+. Kimball ct al.
Rescript-A young man, in 1866, then about
In this state to go to the Western states in
search.ef business or work. He had made
such trip before, returning after short
time. Going this time with acquaintance,
he accompanied them to Missouri, locating
In the town Of Liberty in that state. In 1869
he had long and severe sickness at that
place, during which he wrote home for funds,
which were sent him. Up to that time he
had habitually written to his family friends,
and there had never been any alienation of
aftectlon on either side In the last letter
received from him by the family he wrote he
was going to visit an uncle in Indiana, but
ne did not go there. Getting up poorly from
his sickness, having naturally weak con-
stitution and suffering from lung complaint,
he left Liberty for Chico, California, hoping
the climate there would benefit him. He was
q single man, not very successful in the af-
fairs OF life, not rising above working at
labor in different employments. Chico and
Liberty have been thoroughly searched, the
missing man inquired for through the news
papers at those places, and no trace of him
n wSo p zen discovered, and no person found
W ,o1o mas seen or heard from or of him isince
roao, over twenty years ago. Held: That the
iioao1snaple presumption is that he is dead,
ance w mo iA"oii"
hfis being complaint in equity by the
Ielatives VI tne person alleged to be deceased
against parties who hold in trnst nndev tba
will OF grandfather of such nerson t tno
fund which the complainants seeh ~ be eue
distributed, IL Is within the power of the
COuLt, AVA ghO 6AObtCA plUbSCllOl OIL the firms
tees, to order the fund to be transferred fro1,
their keeping to the keeping of inheritors
imposing such terms of liability upon thes
latter as substituted trustees as may be
deemed reasonable.
Bill sustained. Decree according Tn
opinion, extract from which is filed with re-
script
Extract from opinion to be filled with re-
script for information of parties.
The defendants would like the security of
bonds of indemnity from the complainants.
The proof is so conclusive it would not be
reasonable to require sureties from them or
even that they should stand bounden for one
another. But, as the court has the power to
take the fund from the defendants and COM
NIT 1t to the complainants as provisional
trustees, each complainant who is sui juris
Ewing his own bond for the portion coming
~ ~ nis nands, decree may be constructed, IL
t tao iHeiendants desire that measure of pro-
. .ectlon 70 that effect. The infant Complain
anS cannot give bond, and the guardian
We think d1i 70 DC Ieguired to give one for her
complainant's costs should be aiowad due ont a oa
'ne iund' D. A. Peters, Chief Justice.