Legal Opinion
Weatherhead, Etc. v. the Lessee of Bledsoe's Heirs
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided June 6, 1815No. At once, we perceive, as between claimants and possessors, who were the greatest favorites with the legislature. In plain language claimants are told, it is indispensible we should get our country settled, population must be encouraged; our disposition is to sell to those only who will settle, clear, and cultivate the lands, so as to give the country strength and safety, and as for as we can, consistently with sound policy, to protect such persons, in the fruit of their toils difficulties and dangers. Though there may be a few individuals, who have, or may hereafter, settle on granted lands, without having purchased of any person, and have or may continue there for seven years, yet as we know from the nature of things, that these cases must be rare, it is not important to legislate on so narrow a principle. Especially as such persons will have incurred expence, and for a considerable time will be exposed to hardships and dangers; the owners or claimants being negligent during the whole time, in not asserting their claims,(11) and in most cases not living among as to give that aid and comfort to society, which its situation requires. If persons have good and valid piper titles, they do not stand in need of our protection. It is the numerous body of illiterate men, who have honestly paid for their lands, but who through ignorance of forms have not legal paper titles, or when taken, have or may through time and accident, have lost them. We know, that negligent claimants will be gready more numerous man dish possesors; we will make a plain and simple rule, capable of being understood by every person knowing that simplicity and Anxiousty of rule, in limitation, is an important to its preservation. To those who assisted in the first settlement of the country, we give an absolute title, free from the possibility of any future embarrassment; and therefore in relation to them, there shall be no saving as to infants. &c. (12)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
Ejectment, in Error.
1Opinion of the Court
Ejectment in Error. — The land in dispute was granted to the ancestor of the defendants. Douglas obtained a judgment against Bowman; execution issued; a part of the land thus granted was sold as the property of Bowman. Douglas became the purchaser, and obtained a sheriff's deed. Douglas sold and conveyed to Lyons; who sold and conveyed to Weatherhead, the tenant in possession. Under the general issue, Weatherhead relies on seven years' possession as a bar.
On the part of the defendants, it is insisted that the limitation of seven years will not be available, unless the plaintiffs can show a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ex parte BurrU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1823
- Jackson ex dem. Lathrop v. DemontNew York Supreme Court · 1812
- Bush v. BradleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1810
- Yeaton v. Bank of AlexandriaSupreme Court of the United States · 1809
- Thompson v. MusserSupreme Court of the United States · 1789
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Doe ex dem. Kennedy's Executors v. Townsley's HeirsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- Hoge v. BrookoverWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1886
- Earnest v. Little River Land & Lumber Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1902
- Gray v. Darby's LesseeTennessee Supreme Court · 1825
- Gray v. Darby's LesseeTennessee Supreme Court · 1825
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.