II. The plaintiffs further show to the court that directly following the signing of the said contract in duplicate, they paid to the said parties of the first part thereto ten hundred and fifty ($1050) dollars in cash and immediately took possession of the said above described land and moved thereupon and erected a cement house thereon costing them between eleven hundred ($1100) and twelve hundred ($1200) dollars and otherwise made improvements upon the said lands by clearing up about sixty (60) acres thereof and stumping the greater portion of same and building and erecting fences thereon; and that in addition to paying the said named parties of the first part the said sum of ten hundred and fifty ($1050) dollars, these plaintiffs had expended in building, clearing, stumping, fencing and improving said farm about two thousand ($2000) dollars.

III. The plaintiffs further show that at the time and after they had entered into the contract above set forth with the above named parties of the first part, they were given to understand that inasmuch as they had made a large cash payment upon the said land and would go ahead and improve the farm as they then proposed doing, that they, the said named parties of the first part, would not be in a hurry and would not consider time the essence of this contract in the event these plaintiffs should fail to make the payment of two hundred ($200) dollars then due on such contract April 4th, 1916.

IV. That plaintiffs further show to the court that they are at the present time temporarily residing in Bay County, Michigan, and that they have an agent and representative residing upon the farm and working and clearing the land for them; that upon the 5th day of May, 1916, they received a letter at their home at Kawkawlin, Michigan, purporting to come from James McKay, Prescott, Michigan, advising them that he, McKay, had purchased all the right, title and interest of Ephriam Roe and wife, and Jesse Roe and wife in and to the land set forth and described in said contract, and that he, the said McKay, desired the plaintiffs to pay to him the two hundred ($200) dollars due April 4th, 1916. That at such time these plaintiffs relying upon the understanding they had had with the said Roes was not able to forthwith advance the said sum of money, but at once made efforts to get in touch with the said Roes and ascertain if the lands had been sold to McKay as stated by him. That owing to circumstances beyond the control of the said plaintiffs, they were unable to raise the said sum of two hundred ($200) dollars as soon as they would have liked to and upon the 28th day of July, as these plaintiffs now recall it, they received a notice signed by James McKay as assignee of the said vendors named in the said contract, which notice recited the making of a contract, the failure of these plaintiffs to pay the two hundred ($200) dollars due April 4th, 1916, promptly, and stating that he, the said McKay, had upon the 28th day of July, 1914, purchased the said lands from the Roes aforesaid and had become assignee of their duplicate copy of the contract and in substance declaring a forfeiture of all right, title and interests of these plaintiffs in and to the said land by reason of their failure to pay the said two hundred ($200) dollars and some interest due, April 4th, 1916; and likewise notifying these plaintiffs to quit, surrender and deliver up to him, the said James McKay, the lands and premises by these plaintiffs heretofore purchased of the said parties of the first part to the land contract above set forth and upon which lands they had added improvements to the amount of two thousand ($2000) dollars or more.

V. These plaintiffs further show that upon receipt of the said notice from the said James McKay declaring a forfeiture, they immediately sent Charles W. Hitchcock, an attorney at law, of Bay City, Michigan, to Prescott, Michigan, to see the said McKay with relation to the matter. That Mr. Hitchcock immediately interviewed Mr. McKay at his bank in the Village of Prescott, Ogemaw County, Michigan, stating to Mr. McKay that he had come there as the representative of these plaintiffs and was desirous of paying up all that was unpaid on the land described in the contract set forth in the first paragraph of this Bill of Complaint. That Mr. McKay informed Mr. Hitchcock at that time, which was some time in the month of August, 1916, that he, Mr. McKay, could not accept a tender of the money for the reason that he did not know at that time how much was due upon the lands, inasmuch as there were costs for the service of Notice of Forfeiture and he would have to interview his attorney, William T. Yeo, West Branch, Michigan, and ascertain what said costs amounted to, and further told Mr. Hitchcock that Mr. Yeo had all the papers relating to the matter in question so that he could not at that day accept a tender.

VI. The plaintiffs further show that they have since been advised that Mr. McKay refuses to give them a deed of the said premises and that he is contemplating selling the said land; and they are further advised that the said McKay absolutely refuses to receive or accept the said moneys for principal, interest and any and all expense of serving the notice of forfeiture.

VII. That these plaintiffs have always been willing and desirous of paying for the said lands and still are ready and willing and now offer fully and specifically to perform their part of the said agreement.

Wherefore, your orator prays:

1. To the end therefore that the said James McKay, the defendant hereto, may without oath, all answer upon oath being hereby waived, full, true, direct and perfect answer make to all and singular the matters hereinbefore stated and charged.

2. And that the said James McKay may be decreed to specifically perform his part of the said agreement; your orators, plaintiffs herein, being ready and willing and hereby offering to specifically perform the same upon their part.