FARM LAND VALUES IN IOWA. 19 
to carry out his part of the contract, the fulfillment of all subsequent 
contracts would necessarily be defeated. For instance, if the first 
buyer of a farm failed to obtain title because of his inability either 
to make the necessary cash payments or to get valid title, he would 
be unable to fulfill his contract of sale with the second buyer, who, 
in turn, would find it impossible to carry out his contra¢t of sale 
with the third buyer; and so on throughout the series. Unless the 
matter could be settled by mutual agreement, the recourse of the 
several parties who have purchased the right to receive title to the 
land would be a suit to enforce performance and action for damages 
in case of nonfulfillment. Consequently such a situation mvolves 
the possibility of considerable litigation as well as a large degree of 
financial uncertainty for_the parties concerned. 
In some instances contracts call for the specific forfeiture of the 
purchaser’s initial payment in case of his failure to perform his part 
of the contract. Generally, however, the seller retained the alterna- 
tive right of compelling the purchaser to complete the cash payments 
agreed upon. Usually the contracts did not include a clause involv- 
ing a waiver of performance on forfeiture of initial payment. 
In some cases legal methods of dubious character from an ethical 
point of view were employed for the purpose of reducing the liability 
and risk of the speculator. Two principal methods appear to have 
been used for these purposes. The first consisted of the formation 
of a corporation with limited lability for the purpose of buying and 
selling farm lands. The members of these corporations bought land 
under ordinary contracts of sale, using the greater part of the capital 
for the purpose of making initial payments with the intention of 
reselling the land at a profit. However, in case the land failed to 
advance in value and the buyers found themselves overloaded, the 
liability would be limited to the assets of the corporation and the 
individual assets of the stockholders would be immune. A second 
method was the employment of a ‘‘dummy”’ buyer. The real buyer 
bought the land in the name of another person who possessed no 
valuable assets. The ‘‘dummy” then assigned his rights of pur- 
chase for a nominal consideration to the real buyer, while still retain- 
ing the obligations contained in the contract. The assignment was 
commonly expressed as follows: ‘‘For and in consideration of the 
value received I hereby sell, assign, transfer, and convey to John 
Doe my rights of purchase in and under the attached contract.” 
Apparently such a clause attached to a contract of sale conferred 
upon the person mentioned in the clause the right to complete the 
original contract without obligating him to pay or be held account- 
able to the first seller for the terms of the contract. 
In some Cases, real estate men, not satisfied with regular commis- 
sions, introduced a dummy buyer as a means of sharing the incre- 
4 
