398
| LAND-HOLDER'S ASSISTANT.
|
they were before, and a considerable delay having already
been occasioned, and the chancellor conceiving from every
thing which appeared, or was offered, that this case was
peculiarly proper for the decision of a jury, the caveat was
dismissed: and Chapline (if he be actually seized of " Well done,"
or part thereof) may bring his ejectment at law. It is
however to be remarked that Chapline produced nothing to
establish his title, except a deed which was not recorded until
several years had elapsed after the execution. The
chancellor, indeed, did not dismiss the caveat on that ground, nor
did he even decide upon it. He mentions it now to shew
more clearly (if possible) that this case was proper for a trial
at law. It remains now, to take notice of something else
which was offered as proof of the original runnings of " Well
done." It was an apparently old paper, said to have been
the field notes of the surveyor who originally surveyed
" Well done;" and it was alledged that every thing contained
in the paper, was the work of the surveyor, who has long
been dead. Now, this paper contained neither a table of
courses nor a certificate of the surveyor, nor indeed any thing
else from which it might be inferred that " Well done" run
with the other tracts, except the delineation of a few lines,
which were alledged by the caveator, and by Charles Beatty
(who although not interested, has appeared on every
occasion in support of the caveat) to be part of the lines of those
tracts, as well as the whole of " Well done." But even
supposing " Well done," to have been delineated in this paper
by the surveyor, and that although it was perfectly correct,
there was nothing but appearance to prove that the other few
lines marked off were intended for the other tracts; and, if
intended for those tracts, there was nothing to prove that they
were made by the surveyor. In short, the chancellor
conceived the paper of little consequence, even if the whole had
been authenticated as the work of the surveyor. It was an
outrage to common sense to consider a loose unauthenticated
paper, produced by surprize, on a footing with the plat of the
order, in presence of both parties: And the chancellor is
convinced that no candid, impartial, honest man will think him
inconsistent in his principles on account of having admitted the
caveat in the case of Peter against Beatty, and dismissed
the caveat in the case of Chapline against Scott.
¾¾
ROBERT PETER, ) Caveat in the Land-office, by the
agt. ) Chancellor ruled good.
CHARLES BEATTY,)
On the application of Charles Beatty for a rehearing, the
chancellor thinks proper to state the reasons of his decision.
| |
|
![clear space](../../../images/clear.gif) |