412
| LAND-HOLDER'S ASSISTANT.
|
appears that the lease was comprehended, and that, instead of
forty one, it contained 46½ acres. The rest is all called
vacant land added, to the amount of 179½ acres, at the pleasure
of the party, without regarding the courses of the valued
land, which appears to have been regularly surveyed, under
the name of " Buck's lodge." The certificate of sale
expresses, that, if on survey the land should turn out to be more,
the surplus should be paid for, and if less, a deduction should,
be made. It corresponds with the intendant's other
certificates of sale, and it is wonderful that the meaning of it should
have been construed into a licence to add vacancy at pleasure.
Its meaning is nothing more nor less than this:¾" The
" state sells you a tract of leased land, and a tract of
" valued land; the quantity of both is supposed 101 acres; if
" there be more, you shall pay for it at the stipulated rate; if
" less, you shall have a deduction."
It is true, that in some cases, where purchasers have added
vacancy, on the supposed licence, and no contest has
afterwards taken place, they have obtained patents, on paying &c.
But in every case where a person has claimed the vacancy in
virtue of a warrant, intended to affect it, and executed
accordingly, has the party been allowed a patent, without a
correction of his certificate. The matter is too plain for doubt, or
controversy: the said Jones, however, has returned a second
certificate of his purchased land, made out by the county
surveyor, which comprehends (as he says) all the leased land
clear of elder surveys, to the amount of 45 acres, and 60
acres of vacancy added, in the whole 105, instead of 101
acres expressed in the certificate of sale. ¾It appears, from
the plat for illustration that, although the quantity of vacancy
corresponds with the quantity of valuation land, the survey is
made without any regard to the courses of the valuation land
(said to be Buck's lodge.)
From what has been said, the chancellor conceives that the
matter is brought to a point. Wherever either of Jones's
surveys of his purchases interferes with the lawful
pretensions of Whitford, under his warrant of resurvey, the said
Jones must submit. Wherever Jones's surveys do not
interfere with Whitford's lawful pretensions, there can be no
ground, in the present contest, for refusing Jones the benefit
of one or the other of his surveys.
What then are the lawful pretensions of Whitford? By
the rule or practice of this office established long before the
chancellor's time, the warrant of resurvey entitled Whitford
to all vacancy contiguous to the original tract to be
resurveyed; ¾and if all the vacancy he has added to the said original
be contiguous, he is entitled to the whole.¾But it appears
| |
|
![clear space](../../../images/clear.gif) |