The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1912-02-15

BY the Supreme Court Of
Appeals in Favor Of
William C. Bond.

CHARLESTON. FEB. 15-Agaln.
the supreme court Of appeals %
West Virginia decreed in favor OF
William C: Bond, OF Thomas, W..
va. and y. q Bond. of oakland.-
Nd, In the matter Of a two-thirds
undivided interest in the timber on
a tract Of land Of about $500 acres
lin Poeahontas county, this state.
The. interest of-the Bonds In the tract
was decided.An the case OF Bond ct
al rs. 5TayIot-et al. about year ago
and the decision now relates to the
sale of part of the property to sat
lisfy a vendors lien for about $685.
900. The recent decision is in the
case of Clark ct al vs.. Harper's
Ferry Timber Company ct al.
The supreme court affirmed the
circuit court of Pocahontas county
in the case of Bond vs.. Taylor. The
lPecahontas Tanning Company owned
large tract and sold a part to
Ethe Harper's Ferry Timber Com
lpany For the purpose of develop
Ping this timber the Dnrbin Lumber
Company was formed and was. to
ftake over title to thesame. But, it
turned out lthat TAYLOR had the
timber company deed the timber to
him, s,laaving the bonds on the out
lsIdei Investigation i;prOxed that
tTaSorlHas' the moving spirit in the
itimher. company. and had tnrned the
deal This the court held as fraud
/ aud, deereed Bonds the two-thirds
interest
pending the suit of Bond vs.. Tay=
Tor the suit of CLARK ct al VS.. Har-
per's Ferry Timber Company was
instituted to recover on a vendors
lien. The Pocahontas Tanning
Company had taken notes from the
Timber Company amounting to
$23S,770B6, secured by lien. These
notes were assigned to Harry E.
CLARK and John w. Mccullough,
dealing as Clark and Mccullough.
Besides the Timber company, Poca-
hOntas Tanning Company, Durbin
Lumber Company, Taylor and Bond
were made defendants.
The bill was taken for confessed
except as to Bonds, who appeared
and petitioned that in case of de-
cree of sale the land and timber not
purchased by them and Taylor
should be sold frst to SATISFY the lien
and then, if that was not sufficient,
SO much of the timber as had been
purchased by. : them The lower
court ordered Che whole tract sold
and Bonds appealed.
The supreme court reversed the
decree and remanded the case to the
circuit court of IPocahontas county.
with the order to first decree the
sale Of the land not included in the
Bond-Taylor purchase and then the
latters' property or so much Of it.
as necessary to satisfy the lien.
The question arose as to the
amount. to be paid in cash. The
lower court fixed this at $4,000,
the balance to be paid in three
equal installments. This point was
affirmed.
On the two points the court held
as follows:
/. The purchaser of defined
part Of the timber on tract of land
subject to vendors lien is a nee
essary party to a suit to enforce the
| lien, and, formulating the decree of
sale, the court should observe the
ethical rule requiring sale of land
SO situated in parcels or portions,
corresponding with the interests of
the parties, in the reverse order Of
the alienation, commencing with
the original yendee, if he retains
any of the property.
2. in prescribing terms of sale,
Of a large body Or tand to satisfy
the, vendors lien of nearly $685.
900 the trial court does not abuse
its discretion by requiring only
$4,000 of the purchase money to
be paid in cash and the balance in
three equal instruments in one. two