1. That the defendant Menazip Perron be required to true answer make to the additional matters hereinbefore set forth, but not under oath (the answer under oath being hereby waived).

2. That the contract executed by the plaintiff to Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault be cancelled and held for naught.

3. That a partition and division of said lands between the plaintiff and the defendant be decreed and that reference be made to a circuit court commissioner to inquire into the situation of the premises, and to report whether such premises, or any part of them, are so circumstanced that a partition and division thereof amongst the owners can be made by meets and bounds, and to take testimony concerning the timber taken from said lands to the end that a just and equitable division be made.

John J. O'Hara, George Barstow, Attorney for plaintiff.

Of counsel.

(e) Answer and Cross-Bill.-(Caption.) The answer of Menazip Perron, the above named defendant, to the bill of complaint hereinbefore filed in said cause against this defendant, respectfully shows unto the court as follows:

1. That defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph one of the bill of complaint.

2. Answering paragraph two of the bill of complaint, this defendant admits that the plaintiff entered into the contract with John Gasman therein set forth and for the consideration therein named, but this defendant has no knowledge of the business reasons which prompted the plaintiff to enter into the said contract.

3. Answering paragraph three of the bill of complaint, this defendant has no knowledge of the matters therein set forth and alleged, sufficient to form a belief, and therefore leaves the plaintiff to his proofs as to those matters.

4. Answering paragraph four of the bill of complaint, this defendant has no knowledge of the matters therein contained sufficient to form a belief, and therefore leaves the plaintiff to his proofs as to those matters.

5. Answering paragraph five of the bill of complaint, this defendant admits that the plaintiff made and executed the land contract set forth in his Exhibit "A," but denies that he has any knowledge that in the making of said contract any other legal effect was intended by the parties to the said contract than that expressed in the writing; and this defendant, further answering paragraph five of the bill of complaint, denies that the plaintiff may, as against this defendant, claim that the legal effect of the said land contract was or is other than shown by the words of said contract.

6. Answering paragraph six of the bill of complaint, this defendant has no knowledge of the allegations therein contained sufficient to enable him to form a belief, and therefore leaves the plaintiff to his proofs, but denies that proof of the matters therein contained will have any tendency to entitle him to the relief prayed in his bill of complaint or to any other relief.

7. Answering paragraph seven of the bill of complaint, defendant admits that the lands in controversy are valuable for farming purposes and for forest products, but as to the desire of the plaintiff to carry out his part of any agreement other than expressed in his written contract, this defendant has no knowledge and denies the validity of any other agreement.

8. Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph eight of the bill of complaint.

9. Answering paragraph nine of the bill of complaint, defendant admits that he purchased all of the right, title and interest of said Celestine Boissonneault and Elginas Boissonneault in and to the lands described in the bill of complaint, and further says that he paid them approximately nine thousand dollars for their said interest.

10. Answering paragraph ten of the bill of complaint, this defendant denies that he has any knowledge of any understanding, arrangement or agreement between the plaintiff and the said Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault which was in any wise at variance with or in contradiction of the terms expressed in the written contract between the plaintiff and the said Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault, as set forth in plaintiff's Exhibit "A." Further answering paragraph ten of the bill of complaint, this defendant says that he purchased the interest of Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault in good faith, relying upon the said contract for the purchase of the said lands as set forth in plaintiff's Exhibit "A" as representing the true relation between the plaintiff and the said Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault with reference to said lands; further answering paragraph ten of the bill of complaint, this defendant says that his negotiations with the said Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault for the purchase of their interest in said lands extended over a period of several weeks, and that the plaintiff was fully cognizant of said negotiations; that the said plaintiff, knowing of the said negotiations, made no objection thereto to this defendant, neither did the plaintiff tell this defendant that he had any other interest in said premises than that set forth in the contract between himself and the said John Gasman, and the other contract set forth in plaintiff's Exhibit "A." Further answering paragraph ten of the bill of complaint, defendant says that after purchasing the interest of the said Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault, and paying them approximately nine thousand dollars therefor, this defendant went to the plaintiff and requested him to make a statement of the amount due him under the contract for the purchase of said lands and advised the plaintiff that he was ready and willing to pay him any amount legally his due thereunder; that at that time the plaintiff made no claim against him or that he had any enforceable interest in said lands except as shown by his said contracts. That this defendant, with full knowledge of the plaintiff, thereupon commenced logging operations on said lands and to that end incurred large expense in building camps, cutting roads and getting out timber and forest products; that the defendant sold and furnished defendant with lumber with which to build his camps upon said lands, well knowing that the lumber so sold was designed for the construction of such camps; that between the time of making the purchase of the said Celestine and Elginas Boissonneault in and to said lands, this defendant has expended, in addition to the purchase price aforesaid, the sum of approximately sixteen thousand dollars; that such sum was expended with the full knowledge of the plaintiff and without any claim or objection on his part; that this defendant has now fifty men employed in taking out forest products upon said lands and that should he be compelled at this time to suspend his said logging operations he would sustain great and irreparable loss in the premises; that the plaintiff is financially irresponsible and the damages that would be sustained by this defendant, in the event of a suspension of his said logging operations, could not be recovered by the defendant. Further answering paragraph ten of the bill of complaint, this defendant shows that the legal title to said lands is in John Gasman; that he now is and always has been ready and willing to pay the plaintiff all moneys that may be due him under the said contract as set forth in his Exhibit "A" upon the tender to this defendant by the plaintiff of a good title to said lands; that the plaintiff has not paid the full purchase price of said lands, although payment under his contract with the said John Gasman is long past due. By reason of the laches herein set forth this defendant says that the plaintiff is estopped to claim any of the relief prayed for in the bill of complaint.