« 이전계속 »
« be reversed or avoided, for any Error or Defect (herein, “ unless the Writ of Error or Suit for the reversing such Fine, “ Recovery or Judgment, be commenced, or brought and prosecu“ted with Effect, within twenty Years after such Fine levied, or such “ Recovery suffered, or Judgment signed or entred of Record."
Sect. 2. Provides, 'That any Person“ within the age of twenty
one years, or Covert, Non compos Mentis, imprisoned, or be" yond the Seas,"
."" his or her Heirs, Executors or Administra"tors, (notwithstanding the said twenty Years expired) shall and “ may bring his or their Writ of Error," &c. “ as he, she, or they
might have done, in case this Act had not been made, so as the “ same be done within five Years” after disability removed, " or Death, but not afterwar:İs, or otherwise." Statute of 4 & 5 Anne, c. 16. A. D. 1705.[?]
" CAP. XVI." " Au Act for the Amendment of the Law, and the better Ad“vancement of Justice.”
Sect. 16. Enacts, 'That from and after the first day of Trinity Term, 1706, Claim or Entry to be made of or upon any “ Lands," &c. " shall be of any forcé or Effect to avoid any · Fine levied or to be levied with Proclamations," &c. " or sball “ be a sufficient Entry or Claim within the Statute made in the "twenty-first Year of King James the First, intituled, An Act for ** Limitation of Actions, and for avoiding of Suits in Law, " unless upon such Entry or Claim, an Action shall be commenc"ed within one year after the making of such Entry or Claim, " and prosecuted with Effect.
“XVII. And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, “ That all Snits and Actions in the Court of Admiralty for Sea
mens Wayes, which shall become due after the said first Day of “ Trinity Term, shall be commenced and sued within six Years “ next after the Cause of such Suits or Actions shall accrue, and " not after.
“ XVIII. Provided nevertheless, and be it further enacted, “ That if any Person or Persons, who is or shall be intitled to any of such Suit or Action for Scamens Wages, be or shall be, at the " Time of any such Cause of Suit or Action accrued, fallen or
come, within the Age of twenty-one Years, Feme Covert, Non
compos mentis, imprisoned or beyond the Seas, that then such “ Person or Persons shall be at Liberty to bring the same Actions,
so as they take the same within six Years next after their coming to, or being of full age, Discovert, of sane Memory, at large, and returned from beyond the Seas.
"XIX. And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, “ 'That if any Person or Persons, against whom there is or shall
 Statues at Large, Vol. 6, page 530, (Ero. Ed.)
* be any such Cause of Suit or Action for Seamen's Wayes, or " against whom there shall be any Cause of Action of Trespass,
Detinue, Actions Sur Trover, or Replevin for taking away “ Goods or Cattle, or of Action of Account, or upon the Case, of “ Debt grounded upon any Lending or Contract without Specialty, " of Debt for Arrearages of Rent, or Assault, Menace, Battery, “Wounding and Imprisonment, or any of them, be or shall be, “ at the Time of any such Cause of Suit or Action given or accru
ed, fallen or come, beyond the Seas; that then such Person or Persons, who is or shall be entitled to any such Suit or Action, shall be at Liberty to bring the said Actions against such Person and Persons, after their Return from beyond the Seas, so
as they take the same after their Return from beyond the Seas, “ within such Times as are respectively limited for the bringing "! of the said Actions before by this Act, and by the said other " Act made in the one and twentieth year of the Reign of King " James the First." Statute of 9 George 3. c. 16. A. D. 1769.[?]
“ CAP. XVI." • An Act to amend and render more effectual an Act made in. * the Twenty-first year of the Reign of King James the First, in" tituled An Act for the general Quiet of the Subjects against " all Pretences of Concealment whatsoever.
Sect. 1. Refers to the act of 21 Jac. 1. C 2. and limits the right to the Crowo to sue for Lands, &c. to Sixty years, &c. (Except Liberties and Franchises, and Rents, &c. in charge of the Crown,
Sect. 3. Provides, A Saving for the King's title to Rever. sions, &c.
Sect. 4. Provides, That this Act shall not extend to any Manors, Lands, &c. granted by the King's Ancestors, &c. of limited Estate, &c.
Sect. 5 & 6, Provide, As in the 4th section of the act of 21 Jac. 1. c. 2.
Sec. 7. Provides, As in the 6th section of the act of 21 Jac. 1.
Sect. 8. Provides, For the rights of Persons to Lands, &c. by virtue of any Grant, &c. from the Crown previous to the 1st of January, 1769; "so as such Right," &c. be prosecuted with effect," within the space of One Year," from the 1st of January, 1769.
Sect. 9. Provides, For the right of the Crown to Lands, &c. within the Manor of East Greenwich ; or within the Savoy ; or
 Statutes at Large, Vol. 13. page 50. (850. Ed.)
to any Lands,“ being the Estate and Possession of the late Hospital of The Savoy," &c. “So as such right," &c. be prosecuted with effect within the Space of Two Years from the 1st of Jan
Statute of 27 George 3. c. 44. A. D. 1787.["]
* CAP. XLIV." " An Act to prevent frivolous and vexatious Suits in Ecclesi66 astical Courts."
Sect. 1. Enacts, “ That, from and after the First Day of Au
gust, One thousand seven bundred and eighty-seven, no Suit " for defamatory Words shall be commenced in any of the Eccle“siastical Courts within England, Wales, or the Town of Ber“ wick upon Tweed, unless the same shall be commenced within
Six Calendar Months from the time when such defamatory * Words shall bave been uttered."
“ II. And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, “ That no Suit shall be commenced in any Ecclesiastical Court, “ for Fornication or Incontinence, or for striking or brawling in
any Church or Church Yard, after the Expiration of Eight Cal“ endar Months from the time when such Offence shall have been “committed; nor shall any Prosecution be commenced or carried “ on for Fornication at any time after the Parties, offending shall *have lawfully intermarried."
Since this work was put to press, the Editor has received several Volumes of American Reports, most of them recently published ; such of the cases contained in them, as came too late for insertion in the several Chapters to which they properly belonged, are now given in the form of Addenda.
CHAPTER 2. Page 18 Note [2.] The Limitation of Suits for Land does not run against the Commonwealth. Bagley & Al. vs. Wallace. (In Error.) 16 Serg. fR. Rep. 245. Page 20, Note [2.] In the State of Maine,
" Where a person enters into possession under a recorded deed claiming title to the entierty, and exercises acts of ownership, it is a disseisin of all persons who claim title to the same land to the extent of the, boundaries in the deed.” Prescott & Al. vs. Nevers & Al., 4 Mason's Rep. 326.
" After a sale of land by articles of agreement and payment of " the purchase money, the vendee died, and his wife and children " left the land; the vendor placed a tenant on it, and the posses“ sion continued in him and those claiming under hini, twenty-one “ years : held that it was erroneous to charge the jury that the
putting on the tenant was not an uuster, unless they believed " that the vendor intended to comniit an ouster.” Pipher & Another vs. Lodge & Others, 16 Serg. & R. Rep. 214.
Page 21, Note [1.] In the case of Prescott & Al. vs. Nevers $ Al. (4 Mason's Rep. 326. 329.) STORY, J. delivering the Opinion of the Court, said ; “There is a distinction between disseisins, " which are in spite of the owner, and disseisins at his elecstion. But the distinction often turns upon other principles than •ó those which have been 'stated. The owner cannot elect to con"sider himself disseised, where the act is not of such a nature
as, in law, affords a presumption of a disseisin. But where an " act is done, which is equivocal, and may be either a trespass or " disseisin, according to the intent, there the law will not permit " the wrongdoer to qualify his own wrong, and explain it to be a
mere trespass, unless the owner elects so to consider it."
Page 27, Note (2.] “ There can be no legal doubt, that one s tenant in common may disseise another. The only difference s between that and other cases is, that acts, which, if done by a
stranger, would per se be a disseisin, are, in the case of tenan- cies in common, perceptible of explanation, consistently with the “ real title. Acts of ownership are not, in tenancies in common " necessarily acts of disseisin. It depends upon the intent, with bo which they are done, and their notoriety. The law will not pre
sume that one tenant in common intends to oust another. The " fact must be notorious, and the intent must be established in
proof.” Prescott & Al. vs. Nevers f Al. 4 Mason's Rep. 330, (Per STORY, J. delivering the Opinion of the Court.)
CHAPTER 4. Page 86, Note [1.] Darnall's Errs. vs. Magruder, June, 1827. (1 Harris & Gill's Rep. 439.)
" Appeal from Prince George's County Court. Action of ascó sumpsit brought on the 6th of April 1822, for money lent and " advanced-money had and received-money laid out, expend
ed and paid, and on an insimul computassent. The defendant, “ (the appellee, pleaded non assumpsit, non assumpsit infra tres
annos ; and actio non accrevit infra tres annos. Issues join"ed on the general replications.
" At the trial the plaintiffs gave in evidence the following re
ceipt signed by the defendant : “ Received, June 3d, 1807, of ** Mr. John Darnall, the sum of two hundred and eleven dollars, " which I hereby engage to return to him when called on to do SO.
D. Magruder." Whereupon the defendant prayed the court to instruct the " jury, that if they should be of opinion from the evidence in the
cause, that three years had elapsed from the date of said paper “ before the impetration of the original writ in this cause, that " then they must find a verdict for the defendant. Which opio" ion and instruction, the Court, [Stephen, Ch. J. and Key, A. J.] "gave to the jury. The plaintiffs excepted; and the verdict and · judgment being for the defendant, they appealed to this court.
“ The cause was argued before BUCHANAN, Ch. J. and EARLE, * and Martin, J.
“ Magruder, for the Appellants, contended, that the act of " limitations did not begin to run from the date of the instrument “ of writing, nor until demand of payment. He referred to 2 “ Stark. Evid. 891. Collins vs. Benning, 12 Mod. 444. He 56 insisted that interest could be claimed only from the time de"mand was made of the money due.
" C. Dorsey, for the Appellee. The action is not on the in" strument of writing; but is an action of general indebitatus as5 sumpsit, which admits that the money was due at the time the “ promise was made. He cited Bull. N. P. 181. Walmsley is.