AN EJECTMENT BILL.

To the Hon. Henry R. Gibson, Chancellor, holding the Chancery Court at Huntsville
John Claimer, a resident of Scott county, complainant,
vs.
George Possessor, James Waster, and Henry Trespasser, all residents of Scott
county, defendants.
The complainant respectfully shows to the Court
i.
That he is the owner in fee of [or, that he owns for and during the term of his natural
life, or, that he owns for and during the term of the natural life of Sarah Brown, the widow
of John Brown, or, during the term of the natural life of John Brown, tenant by courtesy
<vf the lands of Sarah Brown, his deceased wife, or, that he owns an undivided one-fourth
tnterest in fee, or for his life, as tepant in common with the said defendants; or, that he is
the owner of a leasehold estate of five years in] and entitled to the immediate possession or,
the following tract of land, situated in the 2d civil district of Scott county: Beginning on a
large walnut, [and so on, describing the land precisely, according to the description by metes
and bounds in the complainant s deed, or other evidence of title,} to the beginning, containing
two hundred acres, more or less, and adjoining the lands of Charles Brown and Henry
White.
ii.
Complainant further shows to the Court that, notwithstanding his ownership of said land
[or, of said interest in said land;] and notwithstanding he is, and has ever since the 1st day
of May, 1890, been entitled to the ppssession, use, and enjoyment of said land, and of the
rents, profits, and fruits thereof, the defendant, George Possessor, on the 1st day of June,
1890, took possession of said land, and has continued in possession thereof ever since, using it
as his own, and appropriating the rents and profits. And the defendants, James Waster and
Henry Trespasser, have been, by agreement with said George . Possessor, cutting valuable
trees on said land, and are now engaged in cutting and destroying other trees on said land,
and removing them therefrom. [Specify all acts of waste or trespass committed by the
defendants, or by any of them.] The destruction of said trees is an irreparable injury to
said land.
in.
The defendant, George Possessor, has recently obtained a grant from the State for five
thousand acres of land. This grant covers complainant's said tract, and is a cloud on his title
thereto. Complainant holds under an entry and grant thirty-six years older than defendant's,
and complainant's privies had twenty years' possession- under the grant from which complainant's title
is derived. The other defendants are claiming to hold and act under their
co-defendant, George Possessor.
rv.
The premises considered, complainant nrays:
1st. That process issue [&c, as in §§ 1S8; 164, ante.}
2d. That the defendants be enjoined from cutting any trees, or committing any other waste,
•on said tract of land; and that they be enjoined from removing, selling, or jn any way dis-
4 The Chancery Court has jurisdiction even when I the land is of less value than fifty dollars. Frazier
I
v. Browning, 11 Lea, 253.

posing of the trees already cut on said land ; and that a receiver be appointed to sell the said
trees already cut, and hold the proceeds subject to the order of the Court.
3d. That the title and right of possession to said tract of land be decreed to complainant,
and that he be put in the possession thereof by decree of your Honor's Court.
_
4th. That complainant be given a decree for all the rents and profits of said land while in
the defendants' possession, and for the value of all trees cut on said land by the defendants,
or by any of them; and that full damages be allowed complainant for any and all waste and
other injury done said land by the defendants, or any of them, and that an account be taken
to ascertain the value of said rents and profits, the value of the said trees cut, and the amount
of damages for waste and injury to said land. 5
Sth. That the said younger entry and grant of the defendant, George Possessor, be declared
void, and a cloud on complainant's title, and removed as such; and that the defendants be
perpetually enjoined from setting up any claim, or doing any acts whatsoever, under or by
virtue of said entry or grant.
6th. And that complainant be given such other and further relief as he may be entitled to
at the hearing.
This is the first application for an injunction or receiver in this case.
Jim F. Baker, Solicitor. John Claimer.
[Annex affidavit to the bill, as in § 789, ante.]
Notice to the defendant
At the hearing of this cause, I will introduce and read as proof the following documentary
evidence
1st. A grant for said land from the State of Tennessee to Thomas Chambers, No. 12,643,
based on entry 819, by Dennis Angel, made in the entry taker's office in Scott county, on May
21,1853. Said grant is dated July 1, 1854.
2d. A deed for said granted land from Thomas Chambers to James Williams, made September 3, 1860.
This deed is registered in Scott county.
3d. A decree made March 30, 1869, by the Chancery Court of Scott county in the case of
Henry Adkins vs. James Williams et al., vesting the title of said land in me, the complainant.
I will introduce the original record in the cause.
4th. A deed by J. M. Newport, C. & M., conveying said land to me by virtue of said Chancery decree.
May 20, 1891. John Claimer,
By Jim F. Baker, Solicitor.