The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1902-06-07

successor and files q cross petition. Al
bauga says that he acted in good faith
On November %. 1899. Mr.. Battey pub
lished his advertisement about the
sale Of the property. Albaugh approved
the sale in bulk, as he says, believing it
the best thing to do. Albaugh says he
was opposed to any long drawn out lit
igation. He says he asked the judge to
order that sale. Charges were sent to
Washington to the comptroller of the
currency that the land was to be sold
for less than its worth. They went
to Emporia and said that Albaugh had
that the comptroller would have to ap-
prove it and Hood rather than to go
through It again consented to pay So
500 more. We say Albaugh had the
right to consent to that decree. This is
simply the case of a man getting into
litigation because he tried to collect
debt. The representa- tives OF the comp
troller went to Emporia to try Hood and
Battey. They Investigated and reported
that they were deceived as to the value
of the land They say they were told
that the land was worth only $41, 900 and
that they were deceived. Hood, who
bought the land, told them it was worth
only $4,000. He can not be tried for
fraud on that. They said they would
report their views as to the value of
the land. They presumably investiga-
ted They promised to- They We're not
dependant upon any one man for their
l11CELDal1Ou
Property has gone up in the last
two or three years and now they come
and say we asked a little country bank
er named Hood what the property was
worth and he deceived US Now they
say they want that decree set aside be-
cause they we're deceived after they had
said in writing that they would deter
mine for themselves. would think
that would bring the blush of shame to
the cheek of a corporation, even blink
ing corporation.
These banks come here after two
years have elapsed and say that Hood
had the deed recorded at night The
gist OF all this is that the land was
sold for $41 900 while they contend It was
worth more These banks are barred
by the statute of limitation. This court
should allow the other court to correct
any mistakes in equity. I hold that Mar
tindale and his friends can not came
into this court. They can file a bill Of
review before the other court This IS
a bill for the recovery of property and
if they can go into any state court II
must be where some Of that land is
located
Attorney T. F. Doran followed Mr..
Gleed and said in part: 4 wish to
call the attention of this court to what
was the contention in the Ford Harvey
case. His contention was that Battey
was a rascal and was cOnspiring with a
personal friend to sell the land for less
than it was worth. What was the relief
asked in the federal court, that the
land not be sold in bulk and that it be
sold by direction of the court The is
sues were the honesty of Battey and
the value of the land. A court Of equity
will not review a question unless some
party to the action by fraud has been
deprived of his defense.
Can these gentlemen come in here and
say they had no knowledge that Bat
tey was Soout to sell them out2 They
entered into a stipulation with the court
that each would be a committee of one
to determine the highest price for which
the land could be sold. What was the
judgment of that court based on? The
report of these people. These people can
not be heard to complain