The Mules That Weren't
A local land deal sours when a man discovers his new livestock are not quite as advertised.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Morgan Crane and his wife have filed suit in the superior court against J. L. Peterson and wife, seeking to compel them to return the plaintiffs' deed to the west half of lot 2, in block 2. According to the complaint, G. Campbell, representing the defendants, proposed to purchase the premises from the plaintiffs and agreed to give the plaintiffs 10 mules in exchange for the land. The deed was held in escrow until the plaintiffs could examine the mules. Upon visiting Colfax to inspect them, the plaintiffs discovered the animals were not what had been represented. Upon their return to Walla Walla, they reported the result of the examination and demanded the deed. Campbell informed them that the deed had already been filed in the county auditor's office and was now of record. The plaintiffs then went to the auditor and were informed he could not comply with their request. Consequently, they commenced action in the court to have the deed set aside and removed from the records.
“Upon visiting Colfax to inspect them, the plaintiffs discovered the animals were not what had been represented.”
A 1903 real estate dispute over 'mules' feels strangely modern in an era where digital property and complex land contracts still lead to litigation. It serves as a reminder that the fundamentals of property law and the risk of 'as-is' trades remain central to city life.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.