Jackson ex dem. Quackenbush v. Dennis
New York Supreme Court
This was an ejectment for lands lying in the county of Washington, to which the plaintiff claimed title under a royal grant, dated in 1770, and the defendant under one of 1688, commonly called the Hosick patent.
Read the full summary
This was an ejectment for lands lying in the county of Washington, to which the plaintiff claimed title under a royal grant, dated in 1770, and the defendant under one of 1688, commonly called the Hosick patent. The only question between the parties was, what is the true construction of this latter grant as to boundary ? The description in the patent is: “All that tract of land situate, &c.v on both sides of a certain creek called Hosick, beginning at the bounds of Schackook, and from thence extending up the said creek, &c., being in breadth, on each side of the said creek, two English miles;…
1Opinion of the Court
Lewis, Ch. J.(a)
delivered the opinion of the court. This creek is so situated that it is impossible to run parallels to it, which shall be always two miles distant from it in its whole extent. It becomes, then, a pretty nice question what' principle shall be adopted in the locating of the grant. Several ingenious ones have been proposed, all of which are liable to exception. For the plaintiff it is insisted that the most rational, correct, and advantageous one to the crown, would be to make a traverse of the creek and taking such line for a base, to run parallels at two miles distance on each…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Williams v. JacksonCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1809