Lessee of Nesbit v. Titus
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
On the trial of this cause, Alexander Eowrey was sworu as a witness on the part of the defendants, who had taken out the warrant under which James Rankin the landlord, claimed.
Read the full summary
On the trial of this cause, Alexander Eowrey was sworu as a witness on the part of the defendants, who had taken out the warrant under which James Rankin the landlord, claimed. It was contended that he should be permitted to give in evidence the parol declarations of the secretary of the land office, at the time of issuing of the warrant, the claim of Rankin to the * lands in question, and his intentions in taking out r*o«5 the warrant; and also the applications of the witness, *- as agent of Rankin, to Richard Tea the deputy surveyor of the district, to cause the lands to be surveyed, and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
It would be of the most mischievous consequence to the community to allow the two first species of evidence to be given; nor under such a practice could any one be safe in his title to lands. It would introduce every evil which the act of assembly respecting frauds and perjuries, was intended to prevent. The warrant must be judged of as it appears on the face of it, and whether it is sufficiently descriptive of, or locates precisely the lands in question, can only be determined by testimony ascertaining the local situation of the lands, and the natural or artificial boundaries or…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Heirs of Galbraith v. DetrichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
- Norris v. MonenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
3Cited by1 opinion
- Norris v. MonenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835