Wallace v. Scott
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Clearfield county. Robert Wallace against John Scott ana George Scott. Ejectment for a tract of land. The plaintiff claimed under a title made by the treasurer in pursuance of a regular assessment of taxes for the years 1828-9 and ’30. The ground of defence was, that the land was not unseated; and in support of this, the proof was by a witness “ that he entered upon the land in 1828, and chopped timber, and made a beginning of a clearing.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Clearfield county. Robert Wallace against John Scott ana George Scott. Ejectment for a tract of land. The plaintiff claimed under a title made by the treasurer in pursuance of a regular assessment of taxes for the years 1828-9 and ’30. The ground of defence was, that the land was not unseated; and in support of this, the proof was by a witness “ that he entered upon the land in 1828, and chopped timber, and made a beginning of a clearing. In 1829 he cleared it off, fenced it, and put in a crop; in 1830 he went to it to reside The land was not assessed in his name…
1Per curiam
Residence with or without cultivation, or cultivation with or without residence, stamps a new character on the tract; but when does residence or cultivation begin ? It was said in Campbell v. Wilson, (1 Watts 144), to begin at the moment of entry. A tract ceases to be unseated as soon as it is actually occupied with a view to permanent use as the property of the occupant. The settlement of an improver, which includes residence, begins with the first stroke of the axe; and it would be strange if a tract settled for purposes of title, might be deemed unseated for purposes of taxation. It is…
2Cited by2 opinions
- McClements v. DowneySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Milliken v. BenedictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848