The Big Stone post. (Big Stone Gap, Va.) 1890-1892, 1891-12-25

all the spare time Of the court, both on
the bench and in chambers. Every point
was contested sharply, and the attorneys
are becoming skilled in technicallties.
and many fine points were brought to the
attention Of the court and passed upon.
One Of the most important cases disposed
of was that of Vim. Kelly VS.. p. W. Hard
in, which was submitted a the last Sep
tcmhcr term The plaintiff sued for
81, 800 claimed to he due on a land trade
for q tract OF land in the town of Big
Stone Gap. just below the /. x. n. depot.
The defendant aimed that the contract
was Il contract of hazard, and that he was
not liable for the number Of acres which
the property surveyed out in excess over
the number of acres which it was thought
to contain at the time the trade Was made.
Judge Morrison gave a written opinion.
we'll considered and remarkably clear in
lis terms. in which he held that the con-
tract was contract by the acre and not
one Of hazard. and dccrccd that the de-
fcndant should pay the plaintiff the $4,000
in excess over the original contract price.
1t is probable that this case will be ap-
pealed \ few DEGREES we're obtained to
torcclosc liens on Big Stone Gap lots, but
the number Of these decrctal sales was
much less than anticipated. There seems
to be general disposition not to press
during the financial status Of affairs for
deferred payments on town lots. Reports
were made of sales made pursuant to de-
crees rendered at the last September
term of court, and in many instances
upsct-bils were put in, which will require
the property to be resod ut an advanced
price.
An important case not so much in itself,
but in its bearing on number Of other
suits of the same nature, was that Of
Mills vs. Roberts. The plaintiff sued to
collecta note from defendant given for
the sale Of an interest in tract of land
near the town Of Big Stone Gap The de-
icndant sought to he relieved from his
contract on the grounds that i'm max ing
the sale to him the plaintiff represented
that a number of enterprises would be To-
Gated near the land sold, and that the
representations had not turned out to be
true and constituted Il case Of 'fraud in
law The case was ably argued hy the
counsel for HE plaintiff, entering fully into
the law OF RECESSION Of contracts for mis-
representations. The Judge rendered
well considered and able opinion, in which
ne held that the representations were of
probable, future events and were given a
Il matter Of opinion as to which the de-
PENDANT had ample means Of knowledge OF
mis- own, and the court refused to rescnd
the contract. This case was straw in
dicating the way the wind may blow in Il
number of other cases Of similar nature
now pending on the docket, some Of which
vii! be decided at thc next term of the
court
Another important chanccry cause
decided was that Of J. j. Kelly, Jr. VS.. A.
j. Stcinman. The object of this suit Was
to annull and rescind Il lease ON :. large
and valuable tract of coal land, a few miles
above Big Stouc Gap, made in favor OF
the defendant in the year 1874, in which
the lessee was not bound to commence
mining operations within any specified
time, nor to mine any minimum number
of tons in any given period. He has never
begun any mining operations whatever
and the court had no hcsitancy in setting
aside the lease, following the ruling of
the Courts Of Appeals Of Virginia, that
where no specified time was fixed in such
Il lease that the lessee was bound in good
conscience to begin within reasonable
time, which had not been done in this case.
There are large number of similar leases
made to the defendant, a. J. Steinman,
who is a resident Of Pennsylvania, on
some of the best tracts Of coal land in
Wise county and in accordance with this
decision he will not be able to retain any
OF these leases. At present they constr
tute clouds on titles, and in many in
stances retard the development Of the
lands by men who would operate them
were it not for the existence of this en-
cumbrancc.