1797] ENTAIL AND A LAND SUIT 43 for your polite attention to, and care of him while he was under your superintendance, I remain with the highest esteem, regard and respect etc. TO BUSHROD WASHINGTON [N. Y.P.L.] Mount Vernon, October 9, 1797. Dear Sir: Mr. Thomas Pearson, heir intail to Simon Pearson, his Brother, has brought suit in the Court of this County, for the lands which the latter sold to Wm. Triplett, George Johnson and myself, five and thirty Years ago. I understand from Colo. Simms who is Pearsons Lawyer, that his complaint is founded upon some irregularity in the proceedings of the Jury, who met on the land to value the same, pursuant to a Writ of ad quod damnum. And the examination of the evidence to prove these irregularities went (for I attended) to the establishment of two Points: Ist. that there was no survey of the premises in presence of the Jury, that the time of their enquiry into the value of the land. and 2ly. that the said Jury did not explore it sufficiently to ascertain with exactness what the real value of the land was. This is the amount of Grafton Kirks evidence, who was one of the Jurors, and who from your Practice in Fairfax County you may have learnt, is a rare hand at all obsolete claims that depend much on a good memory. As I shall be ultimately affected in this business if Pearsons claim obtains (having sold my part of the Tract (178 Acres) to Mr. Lund Washington it behooves me to look into the matter timously. let me then ask your opinion on the following points? Ist. Does the Law providing for the Docking of Entails, by a writ of ad quod damnum, make a survey in presence of the Jury an essential Part of the proceedings? The Writ itself (of which I retained a Copy) directing the sheriff to summon respectable men of his County for the purpose of ascertaing. the value of the land &c., requires no such thing. 2d. Who is to Judge of the mode by which a Jury on Oath is to report their Opinion of the value of the land if they are not to do it themselves? Mr. Kirk swears he did not on the day traverse a foot of the land. Why because says he living adjoining thereto; I could not be made better acquainted with it than I was; neither did Jno. Askins (another of the Jury men) stir from the house at which they met; on the Land. Why again? because Jno. Askins knew it as well as he did. The rest of the Jurors he acknowledged rode but were not gone long enough to go over quarter part of the land. These if not the words are the literal meaning of them, and the sum of Grafton Kirk's evidence. No tampering with the Jury to under value the land is even hinted at. and the transfers devises and descent to Simon Pearson are admitted to be good in order to prove that the said Simon held the land in fee tail and dying (as they say) without legitimate Children that Thos. Pearson his brother is heir in Tail. 3d. Whether as Simon was lawfully married and never legally devorced the children of that woman though begotten (no matter by whom) in the state of separation from him is not a barr to the claim of Thomas? 4th. What operation will the Act of Assembly of Virginia for Docking all Entails, (passed many years after the land in dispute was Docked by a writ of ad quod damnum, and sold in 1762) and many years too before the death of Simon Pearson which only happened last Spring have in this Case? It being understood that the said Simon conveyed the 178 acres, to me with a general Warrantee. 5th. I would ask how far my conveyance of the said land to Mr. L. Washington with a general Warrantee also, make me 1797] A LAND SUIT 45 liable for the buildings as well as the land which has been placed thereon? and 6th. Whether I had better interest myself in defending the suit already commenced in the County Court, or await the decision there and take it up in the dernier resort if it shd. be adverse. I wish also as the case in my Judgmt. turns upon simple points which do not require much study, or research, to be informed (confidentially) whether in your opinion Mr. Swan's demand for defending the suit is not unreasonable? viz.: $100 in hand and the like sum at the close of the business? You may think me an unprofitable applicant in asking opinions and requiring services of you without dousing my money, but pay day may come. If the cause should go to the higher Courts I shall expect you will appear for me, and Mr. Marshall also (if you should not have quit the practice). If the latter should not be returned in time, say who else had I best employ? I beg you will send me and as soon as you can certified copies from the Records of Richmond, of the papers mentioned in the enclosed. With sincere friendship &c. P. S. Whether Colo. Simms has any thing in petto I am unable to say, I am told however that he is sanguine and some add that he is to go snacks.25 *To WILLIAM THORNTON Mount Vernon, October 10, 1797. Sir: Your favours of the 6th. and 8th. instant have both been received, and I pray you to accept my best thanks for the rare and valuable present you have made me. Being the produce of your own Estate renders it more acceptable, and nothing will add more to the go'at of it, than your coming sometimes to participate in the taste, fog, or no fog. *From the "Letter Book" copy in the Washington Papers. I have no doubt but that the section of Square No 21 is judiciously designed. It is perfectly agreeable to me. Mrs. Washington unites with me in best regards for Mrs. Thornton and yourself, and with great esteem etc. 26 *To FRANCIS WALKER Mount Vernon, October 10, 1797. Dear Sir: In answering your favor of the 28th. Ulto. which has been duly received; I wish it was in my power to give you more satisfactory information than you will find, in this letter, relative to the lands near Suffolk. Some years ago (before, if my memory serves me, I was called to Administer the Government of the U States) Mr. John Lewis, as Exectuor of his father, Colo. Fielding Lewis's Will, informed me that the circumstances of that estate required that his father's interest in the lands wch. were bought by him, your father and myself, lying as above, should be sold. In reply, I told him that any bargain for it that Doctr. Walker and himself would make, I would abide by. Since which I have never heard a tittle from either, on this subject. Nor do I know in whose possession, or under what circumstances the lands now are. That they are not sold I am inclined to believe, because the title papers are still in my care, and no application has ever been made for them. These, from a cursory examination, appear to be from. Josh. Jones to G. W. T. W.27 and F L.28 for 2 tracts Acres 872 50 "From the William Thornton Papers in the Library of Congress. "Thomas Walker. Fielding Lewis. 100 1210 1797] A STOVE 47 I thank you for offering to sell me your interest in the above lands, but I have no disposition to become the purchaser, having lately sold my share of the Company's property in the Dismal swamp, and formerly a tract adjoining thereto, held by the deceased Colo. Lewis and myself; I shall be willing, however, at any time, to join you and Mr. John Lewis in disposing of them to any other purchaser. With esteem etc.20 *To CLEMENT BIDDLE Mount Vernon, October 15, 1797. Dear Sir: Your letter of the 28th. Ulto. has been received, and I sincerely regret the continuance of the Malady which afflicts the City of Philadelphia, and other Seaport Towns; but hope the frosts which we have lately had, and the approaching cold, will eradicate the disorder. The Season rendering the Room for which I wanted a Stove in a manner useless for the purpose it was designed, I have procured one in Alexandria. Although it is not altogether such as I wanted, a very good shift can be made with it; and as it superceds the necessity of those I had written to you for, I have now to request you will decline sending them, or either of them. The other matters you will be so good as to send when an opportunity offers. With esteem etc. [N.Y.P.L.] Mount Vernon, October 15, 1797. Dear Sir: The Fish you had the goodness to send me, arrived very safe; and are excellent; for your recollection of that "From a photostat of the original owned by Dr. Wm. C. Rives, of Washington, D. C. Senator from Massachusetts. |