23 taken thereunder, not received in evidence, it not appearing that the specific notices required by that act had been given. Gittings's Les see vs Hall, 2 It must appear on the face of the return to a commission to perpetuate the bounds of land, that sufficient notice had been given to the parties interested. Lowes vs. Holbrook, 154 3. A witness cannot declare in evidence any thing which was taken down in writing as the deposi tion of a witness sworn before him, as a commissioner to perpetuate the bounds of land, inasmuch as the deposition itself would be better evidence, lb. 4. A commission to mark and hound lads, and the return thereof, permitted to be read in evidence, although five years had not elapsed since the recording thereof. to have what weight the jury think it deserves, but is not conclusive evidence, 16. 155 5. Depositions taken under a land commission defectively executed, not permitted to be read in evidence, and the jury instructed that the record of the depositions, and the application to have them read, and the court's refusal, are not to be considered as evidence that the commission had been executed in any manner, or had been returned, or that the depositions of certain persons had been taken, or were then living or had ever lived. Gibson's Lessee vs. Smith, 258 6. The record of a land commission defectively executed, not permitted to be given in evidence to show that a person of whom evidence was offered, was not the person examined by the commissioners, Ib 258 7. The deposition of a witness taken under a land commission legally executed, cannot be read in evidence, unless there is proof of the death of the witness. Davis et al. Lessee, vs. Batty, 264 282 8. Where the cominissioners appointed to perpetuate the bounds of land have not been sworn agreea biv to law, the deposition of a witness taken by them, cannot be read in evidence. Tolley's Lessee vs. Ford, 9. The declarations of a person, who is dead, and whose deposition was 413 LAND OFFICE. 1. Various orders of the judge of the land office for correcting and recorrecting a certificate of survey on the hearing a caveat, &c West's Lessee vs. Hughes et al. 9 2. The register of the land office examined as a witness as to the loss of records of his office, and as to certain practices which prevailed therein previous to the revolution. 126 Hall's Lessee vs Gough, 3. The time when a manor was laid out (there being no record thereof to be found,) is a matter of fact for the determination of the jury, Ringgold's Lessee vs. Malott, 299 316 4. The opinion of the judge of the land office cannot conclude the parties as to a question of law or ть. fact, 5. The general court has a concurrent jurisdiction with the judge of the land office as to the extent and operation of interfering grants; and it is the peculiar province of the jury to decide facts, 6. It was the practice of the land office to reject all certificates of surveys which included land lying within the reserves of a manor, 16. 310 LEGACY AND LEGATEE. 1. The jury are to determine whether or not certain notes were intended to be bequeathed by a will. Walsons's Ex'x. vs. Rine,· 139 2. The assent of the executor is ne cessary to vest a legacy in the legatee, and proof of such assent is to be adduced to the jury, Ib. 3. Whether or not a bequest of a le gacy is evidence in mitigation of damages in an action of trover by the executor, where there has been no assent to the legacy? Ib. 4. The issue or increase of female slaves, born in the life-time of a legatee for life, is the property of the representatives of such legatee. Standiford et al. vs. Amoss, 5. Where a legatee is a competent witness to prove that the executrix assented to a legacy to another legatee, although suits are brought, &c. Cole's Lessee vs. Cole, 526 572 Surety 1. LIEN. 3. Under the act of March 1778, ch. 9, s. 6, as soon as a suit is com menced by the state, a lien is cre ated on the lands of the debtor, and the state acquires a right of preference over the other creditors who had not, prior to the commencement of the suit by the state, secured a lien by judgment, mortgage or otherwise. Davidson vs, Clayland, Garnishce of Blake, 546 2. If such lands be sold by the sheriff under a fieri facias issued on a prior judgment and lien, the surplus of the money arising from the sale, after satisfying such prior lien, remaining in the hands of the sheriff, is to be considered as land, and subject to an attachment issued by the state on its judgment, in preference to a prior attachment issued by a private creditor on a judgment rendered at the same term, lb. 3. Whether the lien arising from an elder judgment is destroyed by a sale of the land under a fieri facias issued on a junior judgment? Arnott & Copper vs. Nicholls, 473 (note) See Attachment 3. Court of Chancery 7, 8. Garnishee. Purchase Money 1. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. 1. The act of limitations is a bar to an action of assumpsit brought within one year after a former action had been struck off. Cawood vs. Whet croft Adm'r of Hanson, 103 2. The act of limitations need not be pleaded to each distinct count in a declaration containing several distinct causes of action. Bullen's Adm'r vs Ridgely's Exʼr. 104 3. The act of limitations does not begin to operate until the expiration of the time limited for the payment of the money secured to be paid by the bond. Glassgow's Adm'r. vs. Porter et al. 109 339 4. Where an administrator files as an exhibit in a suit in chancery an account against his intestate in favour of A. it is a sufficient acknowledgment of such account to prevent the operation of the act of limitations, and the attorney of both the admini-trator and À, is competent to prove that the administrator directed such account to be used as an exhibit and insisted on in such suit. Forbes vs. Perrie's Adm'r 112 5. The act of limitations cannot be taken advantage of in an action of replevin unless pleaded. Smith vs. Williamson, 149 6. Where an action of trorer had been brought which abated by the death of the defendant, and no let ters testamentary taken out on his estate until after the expiration of the three years, the act of limitations is no bar to an action of assumpsit, if brought without de ay against the executor Parker's Ex'rs. vs Fassitt's Ex'rs. 7. The words, beyond seas, in the saving of the statute of limitations of 21 James I, ch. 16, are synonimous with, out of the jurisdiction of the state. Pancoast's Lessee vs. Addison, 350 8. A nonresident of the state, but who is a resident of one of the United States is not barred by the statute of limitations of 21 James 1, ch. 16, in an action of ejectment, Jb. 9. The statute of 21 James I, ch. 16, respecting the limitation of actions, &c has been adopted by the courts of Maryland as applicable to our situation, ib. 10. The statute of 32 Henry VIII, ch. 2, 82, respecting dormant titles, does not extend to Maruland, nor has it been adopted or introduced therein by any decision, ib. 11. Where to a plea of limitations the plaintiff replies beyond seas, to wit, in another state, a rejoinder of the act of limitations of such other state is a departure from the plea, and fatal on demurrer. Harper vs. Hampton, 453 12. Quere Whether a contract made in another state, to which limitations there would be a bar, can be recovered on here, if such defence be properly pleaded? 16. 13. If a contract is made in South Carolina, with a view to the receipt of money in Pennsylvania, the LIVERY OF SEISIN. 1. An ancient deed is evidence with out proof of the execution, if the jury find possession of the land has been held under it, and they may and ought to presume and find livery of seisin, &c Carroll et al. Lessee, vs. E. & S Norwood, 174 175. 2. Although a deed cannot operate as a bargain and sale, it may operate as a feoffment, (there being words "give and grant,") if livery of seisin can be proved; and there may be circumstances from which livery may be presumed. Cheney's Lessee vs. Watkins, 527 22 LOCATION OF LANDS. 1. Evidence is not admissible, at the trial of an ejectment, to prove that the locations made on the plots in the cause were not in compliance with the party's instructions to the surveyor. Gillings's Lessee rs. Hall, 2. To prove a witness interested in the event of the suit by holding land adjoining that in dispute, the land held by the witness must be located on the plots, Ib 23 3. Where the plaintiff makes two locations of his pretensions on the plots, and there is a general verdict and judgment, such judgment is erroneous, Ib 23 4. A deed for part of a tract of land cannot be read in evidence in an action of ejectment, if defence is taken on warrant, unless such deed, and the courses and distanc es therein described, are located on the plots. Carroll et al. Lessee, v8. Norwood, 100 5. The jury are to determine and ascertain from the evidence the true position and locations of the lands in dispute, and on the propriety of allowing the variation of the nee dle, and the rate of such variation. Howard's Le see vs. Cromwell, 118 6. Deeds for different parts of a whole tract of land located on the plots, may be read in evidence in an action of ejectment, although such deeds are not themselves severally located Hall's Lessee vs. Gough, 119 7. Evidence may be given of posses sion under a defective deed which is located on the plots in an action of ejectment, although particular places of possession are not located, Carroll et al. Lessee, vs. E. & S. Norwood, 173 8. A deed although located on the plots by a wrong date, may be read in evidence in support of the location, Ib. 176 9. Evidence cannot be received to prove where a certain tree stood, unless the place where it stood is located on the plots, 18. 177 10. I. two defendants in a joint action of ejectment appear and take defence on the plots, neither of them will be permitted to sever his defence at the trial, Ib. 182 11. If the defendant does not locate his adversary possessions on the plots, he will not be permitted to give evidence of them, lb 183 12. A judgment entered on a verdict for the plaintiff in ejectment for land described to begin at a point (not located on the plots,) to be found by running a certain line, &c. being for land not described by any particular location on the plots, but which was included within the plaintiff's pretensions, Ib 186 13. The jury are not estopped or concluded by the locations made on the plots by ei her party in an action of ejectment, so that the part for which they give their verdict, if for the plaintiff, is included within his claim. Darnall's Lessee vs Goodwin, 284 14, A location made on the plots by one of the parties in an action of ejectment, and not counterlocated by the other, is presumed to be admitted, and no evidence can be received against it. Jarrett's Lessee vs. West, 15. The locations, made by one of the parties in an action of ejectment, on a plot in another cause, in which the other party was not interested, may be given in evi 501 dence against the party making them, Ib. 503 16. A plot and proceedings in an ancient action of ejectment between parties under whom the lessor of the plaintiff in another action of ejectment claims, admitted in evidence for the defendant in such other action to prove his location of the land on the plots, Ib. (note.) 17. Where the plaintiff in ejectment declares for a whole tract of land, and makes title to a part only, it is sufficient to locate on the plots such part, if there is no controversy about the location of the whole tract, and he may, on such partial location, read the patent in evidence. Mitchell et al. Lessee, vs. Gover, 507 See General Reputation 3. Grant 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 18, 18, 19. MASTER AND SLAVE. 1. Trespass will not he by a master for an assault and battery on his slave unless it be attended with a loss of service. Cornfute vs. Dale, 2. A master, in order to retain the ser. vices of his slave who has pe itioned for his freedom, must enter into the usual recognizance for suffering the petitioner to prosecute his petition, &c. Jennings's Adm'r. vs. Higgins, 344 3. If a petitioner for freedom obtains a judgment in his avour, which is afterwards reversed on appeal, his master cannot recover the value of his services from a person who may have hired him between the time of the judgment and that of its being reversed, unless he has given bond to prosecute the appeal, 4. 1b. And if he does give such bond it seems he will have a right to keep such petitioner in his possesSion pending the appeal, 1b. See Land 1. Lien 2. MONEY. MONEY CONSIDERATION. See Bargain and Sale 3, 6. MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED. 1. The count in an action of ussumpsit for money had and received, can only be supported by proof of the actual receipt of the money by the defendant. Parker's Ex'rs. vs. Fas sitt's Ex'rs. 2. 339 And unless the money is retained contrary to equity and right. Green vs. Stone, See Account in Bar 1. MORTGAGE. 405 |