Sistersville oil review. [volume] (Sistersville, W. Va.) 1896-1901, 1898-02-02

quantities, subject to an earlier ter
mination by forfeiture, in case of
failure to complete one well in one
of the four districts named within
one year from date of said leases,
unavoidable accident excepted, and
subject also to forfeiture il the said
lessee failing to complete operations
on a well III such time, should also
fail to the lessor for delay, the sum
of ten cents 10 cts). per acre per
annum after the time for
completing such we'll had expired;
second: that there has been no
forfeiture or cause for forfeiture,
because such we'll was completed in
the specified time and also because
that even if the we'll was not so
completed, it was in fact completed
before yearly sum fell due as rem
tai, and that therefore there was no
such default in payment as gave
cause for forfeiture; third, that the
title Of the leases, when orce per
tected by the fulfillment of his COW
enant to drill a test we'll became
vested, and fixed for the term of ten
Qo) years, and as much longer as
oil or gas should be found in paying
quantities, and that thereafter the
lessee was under no obligation TO
operate further, until developments
in the vicinity of said leases neces-
STATED operations, and gave rise 10
the implied covenants of the lessee
to protect the property from damage
and to take out the oil when found
within reasonable time, and that
meanwhile there could be no -aban.
donment of said leases unless there
was an actual intention to DO so,
and that non.action would not con-
stitute abandonment; fourth, that
undev the evidence in this case
there was in fact no Abandonment.
The contention OF the Elk Fork
and Gas company is that the leases
to Johnston, granted no interest in
the oil or gas in the premises leased,
but simply the right to search for
them, and that only when such
search had been made and oil or gas
actually found did the leases operate
to grant to the lessees any interest
III such substances searched for and
found; that such leases not only con-
ferred the right to search, but that
they also imposed on the lessee the
duty to do so within a reasonable
time, ard that if he did not do SO,
his rights must be considered as at
an end because abandoned by him.
That if no oil or gas was found the
rights of the lessee ceased when the
search was finished and the explora-
tons abandoned.
On one point the parties to this
controversy seem 70 be in accord,
and the court is able to agree with
them, and that is, if Johnston or mis-
assigns failedSto complete one we'll
in either Ellsworth, Meade, Lincoln
or Union Districts of Tyler county,
within one year from the date of
each of said leases, unavoidable
accidents" excepted, and if they in
case of failure to complete opera
tons on we'll in such time, failed
to pay to the several lessons the sum
of ten cents 10 cts,) per acre per
annum, after the time for completl
ing such well had expired, that the
lease at the option of lessor became
forfeited and void.
So far as the question of forfeiture
is concerned, we are impelled to the
conclusion. after giving due weight
to all the testimony relating there
to that, the test we'll on the Smith
farm was completed within the per-
iod provided for in the lease. And
('nnfInnn6 nm 9Th Daoa