The Snyder signal. (Snyder, Tex.) 1887-????, 1912-04-12


advance and reserved the vendors
lien on the land to secur. the pay
ment Of both principal and interest
which is ample security therefor.
The Commissioners Court says
that the terms are neither unusual
nor unreasonable; that the school
authorities cannot use any part OF
the principal )S116. 6.OOO.O0) for the
maintainance of the schools; that
the sale on forty years time is un-
der the circumstances. the best dis
position that could be made there
of that had they demanded cash they
would not have been able to obtain
more than half the purchase price OF
the lands, and could not have hop
ed to invest said cash in bonds that
would bear more than five per cent
interest and that IL was therefore
more beneficial to sell on time Of
forty years than for cash, espec-
tally as only the interest can be us
ed, the proceeds Of the sale always
remaining the same.
The defendants deny that they ac-
ted hastily and without due consid-
GRAFTON, and say that they careful
ly considered all matters and that
the terms of the sale are in all re-
spects legal and within the scope
OF the Commissioners Court.
The Commissioners Court fur
ther says that II any offer wasSeyer
made to them for said lands in ex-
cess OF the amount they sold the
same for by any other persons as
alleged by the plaintiffs, that such Of
fer was not made in good faith, but
for political and sinister purposes,
and that the parties making such Of
fer, IL any did not intend TO carry
the same into effect and made the
same with full knowledge that these
defendants had already sold the
land, and knowing that the Commis-
sioners Court could not disregard
It's order and agreement already
made, and accept the offer so made.
That said offer was simply pre-
text upon which to base plaintiffs
unfounded suit. That said sale was
not made secretly. but was made in
open session Of the court and the
knowledge thereof was not excluded
from any person or persons. No per
son was excluded from the room,
nor was any secrecy enjoined upon
any member of the Court or upon
sny one and that all persons could
have known thereof from inquiry,
for the Court says that it had been
the purpose and intention of the
Court to sell said land which fact
they and each of them, had for
long time prior to the sale thereof
discussed and talked openly With
the citizens of Scurry county.
The remainder Of said answer re-
fers to the fact that said lands we're
under lease and that suit was being
maintained against the same from
the county by William B Fullerton
and others. and that the purchasers
were buying the lands with the eX-
pectation of surveying the same in
70 lots and blocks for the purpose
OF selling it out TO actual settlers.
farmers and small stock raisers, and
that the purchasers would have 10
take vendors lien notes on the land
so sold. That In order TO make such
sales that it would become neces-
sary to make such arrangement with
the Commissioners Court as that
they could accept vendors lien notes
from those 70 whom the purchasers
of the land would sell. such notes
conforming 10 the terms OF the
grantees obligation to Scurry coun-
ty at the same valuation per acre,
bearing like interest. and 20 take g
credit therefor on said original nose
and thereby remove the land 80 sold
by the purchasers from said original
vendors lien. merging the same in
TO said second vendors lien, IL there
by becoming the first lien on the
land so sold.
The Commissioners Court says
that the plaintiffs by bringing this
suit have prevented the court from
collecting the interest due. and have
caused the purchasers to refuse TO
pay the same. and have thereby
greatly damaged scurry County and
It's public school fund.
The defendants harris. Clark and
Grayum. filed "a special answer. Of