Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1908-07-30

~ eONoiy iANOHipSiCul DIS WAS DIdlN-
tiff, is absolutely void. Having no
mind of her own, she could not meet
the mind of her vendee in con-
tractual sense. The deed was an
absolute nullity. Her mind was in
such a state as to render her en-
tirely irresponsible and incompetent
of conveying. No other interpreta-
ton of the law seems reasonable or
humane. If it be not so, then such
person, at least without a guardian.
has no protection whatever: but can
be despoiled of property and means
of sustainance by any unconscion-
able custodian, provided he mortgage
or reconvey the property decided to
him to some third person even if it
be the attorney for himself and the
incompetent ward.
The next contention is that the
Wade and Abel mortgages are each
based on a valuable consideration
and cannot be cancelled without the
return of the consideration. So far
as the Wade mortgages are con-
cerned it appears that a valuable
consideration was passed. All the
mortgages cover the entire tract of
land. Not only plaintiffs undivided
half but also the undivided half OBJ
tanned from plaintiffs children. The
whole tract is shown to be worth
more than 100000. Except for
the interference of Scott r. Stevens.
it could have sold for $5,50O.OO. 1t
is a matter of common knowledge
that lands have since increased in
value. The undivided half interest
in said lands procured from plain
tiffs children is doubtless sufficient
to more than pay off the mortgages
to Wade, and will probably pay part
of the Abel mortgage.
So far as the mortgage to Mr.. Abel
is concerned it stands on different
! footing from the Wade mortgages.
! Whether Mr. Wade had ever had no.
tice sufficient to put him upon his
guard as to the mental condition and
incompetency of the plaintiff, may
be questioned. There can be no
question as to Mr.. Abel. He knew
that an effort was made by some of
the plaintiffs children to have a
guardian appointed for her, months
before she made the so-caled con-
veyance. He had appeared when
application was heard as her attor-
ney. He knew how she had been
secluded. He being the attorney and
legal counsellor for plaintiff, as well
as her custodian, at that time, may
not be entirely irresponsible for
such seclusion. He knew that COM
plant was made as to plaintiffs
sanity some two years later. He
again appeared as attorney for plain
tiff at that time. No hearing was
then had and no adjudication of
plaintiffs condition made, and yet
week afterwards he takes a mort
gage for 100000 upon this land.
He now claims the consideration
should be returned to MIN. 1t is
difficult to learn what this consider
alton was. He states it to be some
land near the Columbia river which
he has never seen and knows little
or nothing about. 1t may be he can
recover this land from Scott r s. tev-
ems. 1t is shown that as a part of
the same transaction, he received a
note for 100000 or 100000, payable
to plaintiff, and it must have been
endorsed to pass title. The money
and valuable note have been taken
from plaintiff. She received moth
ing. Her attorney and custodian alb
sorbed much. Is an equity court
helpless in the face Of such iniquity
Defendants recur in their brief to
the statement frequently reiterated
at the trial to the effect that they
only had notice of plaintiffs con-
veying her interest in connection
with conveyance made by her child
rem We take it that this can make
it no better for them. If she were
incompetent, the fact that her child
rem were conveying their interest
would not render her more compet-
ent. They explained that they con-
veyed for the consideration received
by them, because they believed that
otherwise they would get nothing.
Even if they understood plaintiff was
to make conveyance, it will not be
presumed that they supposed she was
to convey without consideration.
They had right to believe that the
administrator of their fathers estate
would protect their mothers share.
They had been denied guardian for
her for want of means to prove her
real condition, but even then they
could not presume that she was to
be robbed, not only of her interest in
this land, but also her homestead in