292 rSSBBalt BEPOBTBB. �plied its officers with reasons for keeping eilent ; and so we must say that the railway company îs still at liberty to rescind the coiitract if it wishes to do so;. but rescission does not mean that either party may appropriate to its own use the joint property of both, acqiiired under the contract, without paying therefor. 2 Chitty's Contracts, 10.8 9?î, In so far as the con- tract ha^ been executed both parties are bound, and the right of each in the property acquired pursuant to its provisions must be respected. The seizure of the line on the twenty- seventh of February, by the railway company, was clearly as illegal as if the contract -were free frbm objections. Whether there is any means by -which either party may acquire the interest pf the other in the property in controversy is not a question now presented for consideration. Nor is it necesaary to ascertain what interest each party has in the telegraph line. It is enough that the property is owned by the parties to the contract jointly, and that the railway company has wrested the possession from its associate without warrant or authority of law. The parties must be restored to the posi- tion in which they were before the seizure, and for that pur- pose the injunction will be allowed. �NoTB. See Western Union Tdegraph Co. v. Union Pacifie Raûway Co. 3 FED. Rep. 721. ���United States v. Haet. �{Girouit Ctrwrt, W. D. Tennessee. , 1880.) �Succession Tax— Coîtstbuctton op a Dbed— Adequate Considera- tion. — A deed from a mother to her sons conveying land " for and in consideration of love and afCeotion, and the further consideration of the assistance they have rendered me sincethe death of myhusband," is not a deed of gift made without valuable and adequate considera- tion, 80 that the grantees take a succession subject to a tax, withia the meaning of the act of. June 30, 1864 Section 132, 13 St. 288. �W. w. Murray, for plaintiflf. Barris & Turley, for defendant. ����
