Proprietors of Enfield v. Permit
Superior Court of New Hampshire
This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Enfield, and was tried here at May term, 1829, upon the general issue, when a nonsuit was entered, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of entry, brought to recover a tract of land in Enfield, and was tried here at May term, 1829, upon the general issue, when a nonsuit was entered, subject to the opinion of the court upon the following case. In the charter of Enfield, dated July 4, 1761, the township is thus described: “beginning at the south-east corner of Lebanon, from thence south sixty-eight degrees east, six miles and three fourths of a mile ; thence north forty-three degrees east, five miles and one half; thence north fifty-eight degrees west, seven miles and one half, to the north-east corner of Lebanon…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
The question is, whether the demandants have showed a title to the demanded premises ? Those premises are not within the limits of the township of Enfield, as described in the charter, hut are in a gore of land left between the territory described in the charter of Enfield, and the township of Grantham. It can hardly admit a doubt, that the gore was left out of the charter of En-field by mistake. But this mistake cannot be corrected by a court of law. There is no ambiguity, either patent or latent, in the charter, in relation to the southerly line of Enfield. There is nothing on the face of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Jackson ex dem. Mancius v. LawtonNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Jackson ex dem. Van Vechten v. SillNew York Supreme Court · 1814
- Jackson ex dem. Newcomb v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1812
3Cited by3 opinions
- Prescott v. HawkinsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Breck v. YoungSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Proprietors of Enfield v. DaySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841