Allan

Plaintiff sued to recover certain sums of money alleged to have been paid by him to defendant for the execution of a lease of oil land, on the grounds that the defendant was neither the owner nor entitled to the possession of the land in question, and that it had not delivered possession thereof to plaintiff. The lower court rendered judgment for the plaintiff for $12,086.50, being ten thousand dollars principal and $2,086.50 interest. Prom the judgment and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial defendant appeals.

It appears that one McAllister and one Herolz had been in negotiations with the defendant for the right to go upon certain land, which defendant claimed to have at its disposal, in order to search for oil'. Separate contracts were made with each of them, and two thousand five hundred dollars paid by each to the defendant as a bonus for the execution of the contract. The one with McAllister was formally executed, but Herolz’s contract was not so executed for the reason that it was in tended to consolidate it with a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant. Each of these contracts gave the exclusive right for twenty years to drill for oil on…

I concur. I think it necessary to add, however, that nothing said in the opinion is to be understood as an intimation that, where a lease is in writing, the obligation of the lessor, under section 1927 of the Civil Code, to secure to the lessee the quiét possession of the property leased, during the term, although not expressed in terms in the lease, is not a contract in writing, within the meaning of seetion 337 of the Code of Civil Procedure, fixing four years as the limitation for actions upon a liability “founded upon an instrument in writing.”

' Hearing in Bank denied.