| Miss. | Nov 15, 1904
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a bill to enforce specific performance of a contract for the sale of land. The contract which is averred to have been established by correspondence between the parties is as follows: “That, thereafter, and after further, correspondence, complainant offered to purchase said land on the following terms — to wit, $100 cash, less the taxes and rent to January 1st, 1904 (defendant to have possession until January 1st, 1904) — which offer was made in writing now in possession of said defendant, and complainant in said writing proposed to purchase said land on another condition if the proposition hereinbefore mentioned was not accepted — to wit, $100 cash and $600 on the 1st of January, 1904, defendant to pay taxes on said land for the year 1903, and defendant to reserve the rents for the balance of the year 1903.” The bill further avers that the defendant “unequivocally accepted the proposition of complainant, and unconditionally agreed with complainant that she would execute to him a deed to the property above described on the terms proposed.” The court sustained a demurrer to the bill, and refused to enforce the performance of the agreement as set out above, and this action of the court is assigned as error.
The elementary general rule, as frequently enunciated in reference to the enforcement of specific performance of contracts, so far as relates to the particular branch of the subject here presented for consideration, is that the contract must be specific and distinct in its terms, plain and definite in its meaning, and must show with certainty that the minds of the parties;
Decree is affirmed.