The record-union., 1895-03-19
Was IT A MORTGAGE, OR A DEED !?
The instrument Which EmieI S. Her
vagault Signed.
lie Declares 1t Was to Have Been the
the Former, But j. f. Johnson
Claims it Was Deed.

Emiel S. Hervagault, by his attorneys,
White, Hughes 81 Seymour, has COM
menced suit in the Superior Court against
John /. Johnson and Rebecca Johnson
to have conveyance made by the plain
tiff of his property to the defendants de-
clared to be mortgage, and not Q deed,
as claimed by the latter.
In his complaint Hervagault AYERS that
he is the owner of the east half of lot 9. 2
and Q, Fifth and Sixth streets, valued at
Sl.SO0, and that on the 18th OF last March,
being indebted to Alfred Olsen in the
sum OF 500, he executed to the latter q
promlssory note Tor that amount, secured
by a mortgage on the property described.
Ihe plaintiff further alleges that in
January of this year the defendant,
knowing that he owed the note and that
the interest thereon was overdue. falsely
and 1raudulenJly represented to him that
Olsen would soon take the property and
would Cheat and detraud plaintiff out of
The same, and that the latter could have 10
recourse in the matter and no RIGHT 10
redeem the property, and that he could
not III any manner repossess himself of
the same; also, that he ought to have hor-
roWed the money as security for the paw
ment OF the mortgage.
PlalnuH further alleges that the de-
fend2nts represented 10 him that thew
were his friends and would have lent him
the money necessary Tor the payment OF
the mortgage, and that in order to enable
plaintiff to save his property ana to pre-
vent it being sacrificed and falling into
the hands OF Olsen at only small frac-
ton OF its true value, they would advance
him the money to pay OlSen'S claim
derYagault further alleges that such
representations were false; that they were
made by the defendants with the inten-
ton OF awakening his fears, and of taking
advantage OF the confidence which he re-
posed in them, and OF his lack of expert
ence in business affairs, and to cause him
TO believe tnat Olsen would cheat him out
OF his property, and of inducing him to
execute TO them conveyance of the
property.
Plaintiff also alleges that he is of cred
ulous disposition and easily sntiuenced.
and that he is a person of limited and
meager education; that during all his life,
from earliest childhood, he has been en-
gagged III manual labor, and has by reason
thereof been denied the advantages of
education, and is unacquainted with the
meaning and effect Of instruments where
by property is mortgaged, transferred or
conveyed.
He also claims that by reason of such
false ana fraudulent representations.
made to him by the defendants. he was in
duced TO believe that Olsen could at auy
time deprive him of his property: that
Olsen was about TO do so and that plaintiff
could not redeem the same, and that in
| order to save it there was no recourse left
to plaintiff but to transfer the property to
the defendants in consideration of the
loan OF 5000. which he did, believing at
| the time the instrument which he signed
was mortgage, but which in fact was
deed.
On the 18th of last January the plaintiff
leased the property to the defendants for
$40 per month, and they now claim that