Abercrombie v. Baldwin

12 in The title - what ever, that at the time of his said purchase he believes he was getting an undoubted title, or that his vendor had a good title, and that no question could arise adverse to the title held by him. That he had no notice of any doubt in the Title or adverse claim until the last winter - that Complainant made no propasition to him as charged in said bill, That the rent of said acre owned by him is not worth one cent in its present situation.

Respondent William C Pitts severally answering saith, that during the winter of 1843 & 1844, he went into the possession of about three acres of said half section situated upon the South half of said 1/2 section thereof, by purchase of James T Adams, in consideration of the sum paid to wit, the sum of Two hundred & fifty Dollars, he received a warrantie Title with General covenants from Respondent William H Waugh, that the rent of said land was worth last year about the sum of Thirty Dollars. That at the time of his purchase and payment as herein before named, the he had no notice of any claim in favor of Crawford, that he never heard of Nelson A Crawford, he had no propositions of partition or compromise from Abercrombie and never heard of his claim until informed of said matters until a short time before said bill, and that he is a bonafide purchaser for a valuable consideration and without notice Sworn to before me 11th day of W.C. Pitts May 1845. Willis B Nall J P

27 Respondent Virgil H. Tillery severally answering saith that about 1843 he went into the possession of about two acres of said half section, being a part of the south half of said half section, by purchase of Respondent Waugh at the sum of one hundred and forty Dollars which he has paid and from whom he has warrantee titles, that since his said purchase he has made improvements thereon worth about one hundred Dollars that the rent of the same was last year worth about twenty Dollars - the present year about the same. that prior to his purchase payments and improvements, he had no notice of any claim in favor of Crawford, or of any defect in the title, that he believed his vendor had a good title and a perfect right to convey to respondent that before December last he had no notice of any claim of Crawford or of Complainant upon said half section, that he is a bonafide purchaser for a valuable consideration without notice that no offers of compromise or partition were made to Respondent as charged in said bill.

Respondent Thomas Underwood severally answering saith that on 26th of January, AD 1843 he went into the possession of one eighth of an acre on said half section situated on the south half of the same by purchase of one J. B Colemanan Respondent to this bill, at the price of ten Dollars which he paid and from whom he received warrantee titles. that since said purchse he has made improvements thereon at an expense of about three hundred and fifteen Dollars.

14 That in 1843 the rent of said inprovements were worth Eighty thirty Eight Dollars, in 1844 twenty seventy five Dollars and he has rented the same the present year at seventy five Dollars. That his purchase payment and improvements were all made with out notice of any claim in favor of Crawford or Complainant & without any notice of any defect in title. That when he purchased he believed his vendor had a good Title and a perfect right to Convey to Respondent. That Complainant at no time made any offer of compromise or partition to Respondent as charged and he was not informed of said offer or as to the nature of Complainants claim until so informed by said bill. That he is a bonafide purchaser for a valuable consideration without notice

Respondent John Mingo severally answering saith that in 1832. he purchased of Respondent Joseph W. Baldwin about two acres of said half section the same being apart of south half section of said half section the price of twenty Dollars, which he paid and received from his Vendor warrantee Titles, but that his vendor has since become insolvent and is now irresponsible. That before his purchase and payment he had no notice of any claim in favor of said Crawford or of any defect in The Title of his vendor he believed he was getting a perfect Title that his lot was unimproved when purchased by him the same is yet unimproved and the rent thereof worth nothing that no such offer of

15 compromise or of partition was made to Respondent as charged in said bill but he was not informed of any claim in favor of said Crawford or complainant unitl about the time of the Exhibision of said bill that he is a bonafide purchaser for a valuable consideration without notice Sworn to before me} John Mingo the 17 day of May 1845} Willis B Nall J P } Respondent John B. Coleman severally answering said that during the year 1842 That Respondent by purchase of Respondent Joseph W Baldwin from whom he received warrentee Titles went into the proposition of Twenty acres part of the South west [blank space] quarter of said 1/2 section thirty five that said Baldwin has since become insolvent and is not now able to respond in damages of there was a failier of Title that prior to said purchase and pay merit he was uninformed as to claim in favor of Crawford or any other adverse to his vendor neither was he informed as to when the Patent issued that he was informed that the Titles were good, and in which statement he fully confided That he had no notice of any claim Either in favor of Crawford of Complainant until so informed by complt during the present year. denies that he Complainant ever proposed to [???] to compromise or to receive a reasonable compensation or amicable partition as charged in said bill. J B Coleman And these Respondents further answering jointly and severally deny that the value of the rent of

16 the said improvements are or have been worth the sums named in said bill and say that there have been divers conveyances from the vendors of said Baldwin who purchased of said Robert G Haden Seenr. Respondent further answering on information & believe the information true, that if said Complainant has any quit claim conveyance from said Nelson A Crawford, that the same was not made upon any consideration passing from the Complainant to the said Crawford, but the same was the result of a fraudulent combination between the said Complainant said Robert G Haden Seenr and said Nelson A Crawford and made in the place of the deed before made by said Crawford to said Haden & upon full information on the part of the said Complainant and said Crawford and Haden of the Extensive & progressive improvements made in progress on the said half section of land, Respondents further answering saith, that if any such conveyance was made as stated in said bill by said Crawford, that the same was made while Respondents were in peaceful quiet and uninterrupted possessions and when said Crawford was not in possession and had no right to the possession of the same or any part thereof and Respondents insist that they and those persons under whom they claim have held adverse possession under paper Titles since the year 1835 and they insist upon the benefits of the statute favoring them who hold adversely under paper Titles. Respondents further insist that if said Nelson A had not before conveyed to said Haden, that by his silence and acquiescence in the possession of Respondents and failure to