CHASE v. MANHARDT.—1 BLAND. 311

After what has been said, the description given in Browning's
special warrant can scarcely require a single remark. It is defi-
cient in every particular, and in fact amounts to nothing. It does
not describe any space, area, or tract of land whatever. It does
no more than designate points or spots; but whether by so doing
it is meant to indicate the place where the outlines of a tract are
to begin; or whether the quantity called for is to be laid off round
them as the centre; or in what direction from them, is not said.
But it will be difficult to conceive of a description which has more
entirely excluded every idea of space, area, or tract, than that con-
tained in this special warrant of Browning. For every purpose of
giving title to any tract of land, it is a mere nullity. But allow to
it every thing to which it can pretend; let it be considered as no
more than a description of the place of beginning; and then, even
to that extent, it can now be of no avail to the party; since it
appears by the certificate of survey, that the boundaries have not
been commenced at the place thus specified; and the survey not
having pursued the description grven, it is in itself a total aban-
donment of every special pretension under the warrant. Land,
Ho. Ass. 472, 480. As to the nature and sufficiency of the descrip-
tion of the place of beginning, which Cunningham caused to be
noted down on the surveyor's book, nothing need be said, as
he has not relied upon it for any purpose. It appears from the
plot returned, that Browning's Hunting Ground runs entirely
across Cheviot Dale. Browning may, therefore, have his certifi-
cate so amended as to comprehend either parcel of land within the
lines of his present certificate, which is not covered by Cheviot
Dale. Garretson v. Cole, 1 H. & J. 374.

Whereupon it is adjudged, that the caveat of James Cunning-
ham be and the same is hereby ruled good as to the whole extent
of Browning's Hunting Ground comprehended within the lines of
the tract called Cheviot Dale. And it is further adjudged, that
Meshak Browning have leave so to amend his certificate as to ex-
clude all the land lying within the tract called Cheviot Dale; and
that the said Browning pay all costs.

* CHASE v. MANHARDT. 333

MOTION TO DISSOLVE INJUNCTION.—MISTAKE.—CONDITION IN CONTRACT.—IN-
TEREST.—ATTACHMENT.—FRAUD.

On a motion to dissolve an injunction on the coming in of the answer, the
facts only as set forth in the answer are to be considered as established,
not the opinions or reasoning of the party; and therefore, where a de-
fendant insisted upon a claim to a certain amount, according to certain
proceedings which, of themselves, showed that it could not have
amounted to so much; it was held, that the facts so shown by the de-