Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1898-05-03
THE ANSWER FILED
By B. W. Peterson to the Bill by
Samuel N. Fox, ct al,
In the Suit Involving a Tract of
Twelve Thousand Acres of Land
in Wetzel and Marion Counties,
Recently Filed in the Circuit
Court of This County.


M. Fox and others, is a separate an
swer and the defendant reserves the
right of exception Ito the amended
bill for its manifest errors, uncertain
ties and insufficiencies.'
Defendant says it is true that plant
ifs. as executors, executed to respond
ent the deed of June 1, 1889, and it is
further true that the deed was ad-
mitted to record in Wetzel and Mar
ion counties; it is also true that
Samuel Fox and George Fox received
from respondent $4,000, the condition
mentioned in the deed and that there.
after respondent exercised the right Of
ownership over the land in question
known as tracts Nos. II, is and IA, in
William Worth soconnection Of sur
veys 1t is also true that portions Of
these tracts were conveyed and dis
posed of during the lifetime of George
Fox, deceased. Respondent believes
that George Fox acquired the land in
1897, and executed a power Of attor-
ney, which continued until the death
of VIM. F. Peterson, father of respond
ent, June IS, 1867, when respondent
was but 16 years Of age, and wholly
unfamiliar with the transactions Of
his father relating to said land, and
he only knows in a general way that
his father acted as agent for George
Fox up to the time Of his fathers
death, and is only able to say from
information long since acquired that
the 10000 acres were sold and con-
tracted to be sold during the contin
uance Of his fathers agency
Respondent denies on information
and belief the averments in the
amended bill that VIM. F. Peterson,
the younger the son Of VIM F. Peter
son, and the father of respondent, sue
ceeded VIM. F. Peterson as agent, but
on the contrary alleges that VIM. f.
Peterson, the younger, was neither
authorized to act or in fact acted as
the agent CT the said George Fox, be-
tween the time Of the death Of VIM.
F. Peterson, the elder, and the execu-
ton by Sobieski Ross of the power of
attorney to VIM. F. Peterson, the
younger Respondent says this pow
er of attorney was duly made by Geo.
Fox and wife to Ross, which made
VIM. F. Peterson, the younger, the
agent under Ross, who died in October,
1877, and upon his death the power to
VIM. +. Peterson came to an end.
Respondent has no personal knowl
edge as to what extent. if at all, VIM.
F. Peterson, the younger, acted in the
management of the land, either dur
ing the lifetime of Ross or after his
death, but he knows his brothers Wis
its to Wetzel and Marion were few
and brief and that what he did as
the agent under Ross, or after his
death. so far as the land was con-
cerned. was through persons en-
ployed for that purpose, and after the
death of Ross. w. F. Peterson, the
younger, was not on the land more
than once or twice, until after the re-
spondent's purchase. During the
whole period the lands were under the
agency of VIM. f. Peterson, the land
was in a wild and unimproved state
except those portions, scattered
had been improved by persons under
deeds Of contract. The land was diff
ficult of access. being at a distance
from the railroad. the boundaries
were in many cases not defined, and
many persons occupied portions of the
land under alleged contracts made by
persons assuming to act for Fox, or
Ross, or VIM f. Peterson, the young
er, but really having no authority TO
do So and many other portions of the
land We're claimed. but not occupied,
by persons holding similar papers
with the like absence of authority.
1t is further alleged that at no time
prior to respondents purchase, in
June. 1889, did VIM. F. Peterson, the
younger, have any precise knowledge,
either through his own investigation
or through specific or detailed infor-
nation from others. of the number of
acres of the said land which had been
as of any date conveyed away by
deeds. or of the number of acres OF
the same which were as of any date
in the actual occupancy of persons
claiming to have contracts for the
same. or of the number OF acres OF
the said land which remained undis-
posed of, either by deed or contract. or
unclaimed by others. and the only
specific information respondent had
was obtained in the spring of 1889
Respondent then takes up the de-
taiied averments in the bill and de-
MES them specifically and in detail.
The entire answer makes forty-two
pages of typewriter matter, and
Fell,