West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1899-02-02

re.u hag 3D. biizttion which los lrt rerC as
bee tetaei by The upre sc Cont ot Appeals
81 tifs ttafc
YYar respondents de1y that the peach or
ehatd and tho alleged th rty town i0ts nso
worh $40 ailesel 20 AID bili OF eouap in,
The said iaud ou which 'hs AID ail. ,-1 De.,h
orch iid ~ situate. aiI oGt Of part ~ WHICH
thhts town lots afo claimed 10 have been
carved. apJchrs oa tEe ilnl book 90 -
Preston county "a a whu.s anil ssc.se al
the % q Of sis5 O SisiLOl lees than tine plain
tin a'leges Il g. worth
at respondents Ieny tina; the yiryiai re
ports and Wet \ g''In tenorts are Of ;i.o
value aHe ei i1 saiI Oil u e,n3i,in, The
said see of Nirgia'a 30 osts 80 os mc'udo Sac
isb .ratsAn. as a, excl nor j. ths SEQ sar-
pie'r: nearly all che yo'umei were 90 shabby
ttd disfZu I'd b!dirt. aHG sonc so tbs vol
umes ~ urh pu3r bi1diny 10 r,e.t DO
priNe ilcia ~ ho.r .cfliness. The said p. ~
West Virgni Report, was sold f.r yyas; some
respondents consider fair price Geo. bidy
soilcd second hani books The salt Virginia
ana "es' virginia Re3ar we G fist sold $,
the plaintiff &c tho prit - son Dor set ard he
deciinol - mpy with the torms OF sale
They were again offered Tor sa e al which time
rca"oGd uts made an en 40 ~ hiyo am tho
lawyer. in town ure.ent, by cen log s.r Geo
\. ic'"nad out nffer ihcm and - notify
thc th,t said bulks were 90 be- again ofer-d
for ale i1 o,der that ull mi-h' have fair
chincc md iha books sol for tha.r value: tie
laws rs present being COL r. ~. Monrie. w.
g. Brown, danes a. iirown tha ptaintifD o..
N Mcdonald ard r. !. Crog u. of the Kii.,
wood Bar, ant N. = uLrletty lawgef flom
distance, also an oxaeriea-ei book ~ m.
nciiher 81 whp hui - SET of ihs yIrfn-i Re
p,rt'. with tn exec ,ti,n OF $40 g. e. own.
no % ID u'.y 90 il" lsw3sr.u etuf the No.t
Virlaa Reports. with tho exception of wm G..
Brown and >. j. Cr 70 Ypur rospnnlouts
here submit that hul Che virginia Eeports l., a.,
Of the vtluo place uoon t,em b. the plain
! tin. that certainly c, iont Noaro,. Sir. crossu
or Mr. NoDolald. either OF whom woro nmuly
able 10 pay. would have Ia nped at the bar
gain' and me same can DO said as 10 the west
| virginia Reports. Your respondents allege
That the value OF these books, ai claim1i. by
tne plaintiff, is largely creature OF his i'm
agination
Your respondents deny that the American
aud English Elcyclol pei a OF Law was worth
$1,000, as claimed by the plaintiff. as the pub
| fishers are 'nly Offering 81 100 a volume for the
same when given il exchange for the 80 cond
edition Of the same work. The set was sec ond.
] hand and re fponlents al cge that it sold Tor
| ITS full value Your respondents also aliege
! that the text books, out OF date aud secnnd b.
hand az they We're In many Inst noes sold for
sums far In excess OF their respective values
Your respondents 1sny shat tho oeica FUR
niture of the plaintiff, consisting Of desks.
! Typewriter. chairs. So, was worth not less
than $40 as allie eel in said bill of co,npasnt
Your respondents here allege that the said
ONCE iur"iiure consisted of the following
named rtic'es 10 VT a second hand type-
! writer and desk, not worth wait II sold for,
one 3Oyearo'd .afe, purchased by the plaintiff
nj said sale a. so, AMI VIII 'ch c3u Il have been
bought at any second hand safe tore FOR not
over IS; one che Up table, sold for 81 its fnl,
value; t"o lamps. So; four ordinary chairs. 81;
ono stove aud pipe, sold FOR g, It's fun v ,lue.
TOUR cheap window blinds. seli for 81. one
pigeon hole case sold for two dollars which
ANY cabinet maker wou,d fur ish for one dol
ia ; one hFe-screen 2jc; one old aud discarded
letter pre- s. soc; total. 50 /; otull value abont
SIOi therefore, your sp1ndonts further 81 cne
| that the said Office furniture which sold for
ie"o brought about &C. aDo, its actual value.
f'"r reSion ients ngihltt ldiudf had
rr'oaii - of rson,l prnp,rtg set ont
lbs 10 ofco p ai1t OF tn lue { er &,
al cgei an sc fJt,1 Your icpn en-.
iutth 'r answering IRE az eye. hat che tot a :
'"'ue vi MI thf erS'na' p 0pa IS e iled to
D We en- owuei 10y IN sai plant If Jas 4.
browu at aud b, for the Il e of exe,s.tin
ala iru5 G. SO RE ppudtnis. Is : ont I'm
il.
his solemn oath 81 559SJ.DO Ycurre,po. d n :
turtle anS"e Ing zee pos tiv alIeso IN, {
SAID plai II ]. mes a. rown. az the inc
| oil the at ass ssnent II personal roper v
! Just prio 10 his execution of sal trust wien
as0e for tn value Of his persohaI %. oTtr y
! Tor the purposes Of tax zion took In, fI,,y
ing solemn tn as requi ca 80. ton ~ OF
hapter OF the coGe Of West Nir.iri 60 wit;
o'emr'y wear that the above i,t CON.
M to o. be Of 20, En vile 90 and hoI,cf.
| ulul ana cniitci staff men. Of al he ucis. "a !
property money. oiedits nd Investments he
! l9nt'ng To me wheth The ,iiuc ure in ,r out
| 1ui cd bv law To- DO listed for is,xst'o ~ ~
.St Us "ont al tIict Of Preston rurty. u d
! thai the valuation liked 40 the Same 30 ~,
eroof "9" F"'"e
Your respo' dents an sc that unie err said
Sole maud iHding oath the said p'ajni II
James y. Brown stat that ~ The persoual
/ P.oserty ow",d or cl iueI by him. under
ON 'rnt heads, VS. worth but $40. or
/ s. 5a 90 less than nc now svedrs IL was Nv.rIb
for the purp2s of this suit Yon respond
EMS here ME. "s part OF the answer
marked 3 Xhibit ~ the GO tihcate Of Geo.
walls ler' 81 the County Court of Preston
/ C'unty. showing the va ne ~ the sHl t,lo -
tn personal property $50 when given IN TO
! ths assess und rr oath for the pnrp sea Of
taXat ON: nj respondents here refer To- the
/ PLAINTIFFS II To show the vatus of said per
soma pso orty B2s5 OW when given by linn
! ""osFoeM for Ga purposes of this suit.
/ 4oui respondents ans ,erin. tins .al.era tiop
| az tho ainuH bill as TO- Ga sue Of tie eg,
acres witho loud od tho 6 tic. aI cee fhat the
+ plaintiff pre9tted to adve.tiscme & af IN
! 50 eani sail hOt y o. to yonr re-. p5pde T..
I about the al eS q cloud ON the tit q; that the
/ said rlaint n vas presstt the sale and MS
sisted sDnndouts in selling said Ian by aii
/ ing the aucti neor givingsa descfipt OF. of the
/ laud, i's aurs0un lings. a &C.. Your tesp9ndeuts
/ claim that iho allegation egardirg ,bs action
I Of resp ndents in the salo At said qg2 acres
\ with alleged clio d oo U.s. title. come wit
poor ice from the plaintiff who .clai.ns "a, Doe
o lawyer iu active Practice Your rc. pondonts
submits That 10 was q cqu table. iIieqlI
and unjust 60 sell said tract of land with the
/ cloud eforesaid thereon ns olie.ed by tho
piaiutn la bis nil of comp alnt Che said
/ pl"intiG 10 'uId be- the last to con plain when
i Ut was at hts own suggestion ANA rclpo.t that
said iaut DE SO Sold ify1ur resp, do ts d
/ wrong boz sp selling sci land. llis, aea v,.eJ
th't thr plaintiff cannot now O. ko.Hdyant,es
T of tic toI1e after hlvnt u- roqpe.f.d
aided and uLt.trfi connie ffiry said ,..... ..