(7) Warner v. Tanner^ 38 Ohio St. 118. — Tanner
and one Bartlett executed an instrument under seal
by which Tanner leased to Bartlett two acres of land
with use of water and the privilege of conducting it
to a cheese house to be erected by Bartlett. Bart-
lett agreed to pay $30 per year for the premises while
he should use them for the manufacture of cheese,
and, when the premises were no longer to be used for
that purpose, they were to revert to Tanner, Bart-
lett having the privilege of removing all buildings and
fixtures erected by him. Bartlett claimed that,
under this agreement, he had a life estate, provided
he compHed with the conditions of the contract.
(8) Proffitt v. Henderson^ 29 Mo. 325.— David



Digitized by



Google



122 CASES ON REAL PROPERTY

Proffitt, at his death, was seized of a certain tract of
land, in which he devised to his wife a life use, and
at her death the remainder went to his children.
The widow conveyed her interest to defendant.
This action was brought by the children against
defendant for waste in cutting and carrying away
timber worth $600. It was shown that the property
was timber land and not valuable for anything else.
