|
5th. Did you ever know an instance in which a certificate
had been vacated for any defect unless the person caveating
shewed his interest in the land?
Answer. He does not now recollect any particular
instance in which a certificate was vacated for any defect,
unless the person caveating shewed his interest in the land;
except where in one case the chancellor declared both
certificates void; and, in another, where the party admitted there
was no actual survey.
6th. Is it not the invariable practice? or did you ever know
the judges to order a certificate to be vacated or corrected,
where the interest of the caveator did not appear?
Answer. To the first part of the question he answers that
it has been the practice for caveators to shew their claim to
the land at the time of hearing: To the second part, that he
does not recollect any case in which the judges ordered the
vacation or correction of any certificate where the interest of
the caveator did not appear.
7th. At the time of trial of the caveat unless the interest
of the caveator did appear or was admitted, has it not been
the invariable practice to dismiss the caveat unless the
caveator required further time to make his interest appear?
Answer. That from the cases stated as exceptions in the
5th question, it cannot be considered to have been an
invariable practice to dismiss caveats unless the caveator shewed
his interest, but states it to have been a general practice.
¾¾
Questions by the Defendant to Mr. CALLAHAN.
1st Question. Did you ever know a caveat dismissed
where the certificate caveated was objectionable because the
caveator had no interest in the land included in such a
caveat?
Answer. I have no recollection of any such case occuring.
2nd Question. If a person having no legal seizin in an
original, executed a warrant of resurvey including vacancy
and paid the caution money, and this same vacancy was
afterwards included in a subsequent certificate, and paid on, ¾
on a caveat by the latter, would the first certificate,
according to the general usage of the land office, be vacated as
to the whole of the vacancy? if yea, mention any particular
instance.
Answer. I do not recollect any instance where on caveat on
the ground of the party not being seized in fee, and the
allegation supported, that the caveat did not prevail, so far as my
recollection goes, in all cases in the land office.
H H h
| 
