Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

G
Gelston v. Hoyt, [CONSTITUTIOXAL AND COMmox Law.] 246

H
Hughes v. The Union Ins. Co. (Common Law.]

159 Hampton, (Shepherd r.) [COMMON LAW.]

20.0 Hepburn, (Dunlop o.) [CUANCERY]

231 Hampton v. McConnel. [CristITUTIONAL LAW.] 234 Hoyi, (Gelston v ) [ConstitutIONAL AND Cnumox law.] 246 Houston v. Moure, (Practice.]

433

J Jackson o. Clarke, [Common Law.]

1 Jackson, (Brown v.) [COMMON LAW

449

[ocr errors]

53

K Kyger, (M'Iver v.) [Chancery.]

L Lunusse 'o. Barker. (Common Law.] Lenox v. Prout, [CHLANCERY.] Leslie, (Craig v.) [CHANCERY.]

101 5.0 563

M
M.Iver o. Kyger, [Chancery.]
M'Connel, (Hampion d.) (CoastITUTIONAL LAW.]
Murray u. Bakeri (Common law.]
M'Roberts, (Cameron v.) (Cuenca.Y.]
Moore, (Houston v.) [PRACTICE.

53 23+ 5:1 591 433

59

204

601

N
The New York, [INSTANCE Court.]
Nicholson, (Paiton v.) (Common law.]
The Neptune, [I.stance Court.]

o
Olivera o. The Union Ins. Co. (Commox Law.]

183

P Patton o. Nicholson, (Common Law.] Prout, (Lenox v.) (CHLANCENY.] Palmer, (The United States v.)

204 520 610

[blocks in formation]

R
Robinson o. Campbell, (CoxstITUTIONAL AND LOCAL

Law.]
Radford, (Craig o ) [Chancery.]
Ross v. Triplett, [PRACTICE.]

Ś
The Samuel, [PRACTICE )
The San Pedro, [Instance Court.).
The Star, [Prize.]
Swann

v. The Union Ins Co. [Coxmox Law.] Shepherd u. Hampton, (Coumox Law.]

77 78 78 168 200

T Triplett, (Ross v.) (PRACTICE.]

600

.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

U
The Union Ins. Co. (Tugcs v.) [COMMON LAW,]
The Union Ins. Co. (Swann v) | Coumo. Law.]
The United States, (Dug:in v.) (Common Law.1
The Union Ins. Co. (Olivera v.) (Common Law.]
The United States r. 150 Lrales, Instance Court.)
The United States v. Bevans, (CorSTITUTIONAL Law.]
The United States v. Palmer,

159 -168 172 183 232 336 610

W Williams, (Burton o.) [Local Law.]

529

REPORTS

OF

THE DECISIONS

OF THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

FEBRUARY TERM, 1818.

(COMMON LAW)

Jackson, ex dem. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

Now-YORK, v. CLARKE.

G C., born in the colony of New York, went to England in 1738, where

he resided until his decease; and being seized of lands in NewYork, he, on the 30th of November, 1776, in England, devised the same to the defendant, and E. C.,a s tenants in common, and died so seized on the 10th December, 1776. The defendant and E. C. have ing entered, and becording possessed, E. C. on the 3d December, 1791 bargained and sold to the defendant all bis interest. The defendant and E. C. were both born in England long before the revolution. On the twenty-second of March, 1791, the legislature of New York passed an act to enable the defendant to purchase lands, and to hold all other laods which he might then lie entitled to within the släle, by nurchase or descent, in fee simple, and to sell and dispose of the samo in the same manner as any natural born citizen might' do. The treaty between the United States and Great Britain of 1794, contains ihe following provision : "Article 9ih. It is agreed that British subjects who now hold lands in the territories of the United States, and American citizens who now bold lands in the dominions of his majesty, VOL. III.

2

[blocks in formation]

shall continue to hold them according to the nature and tenure of their respective esiates and cities therein; and muy grant, sell, or devise the same to whom they please, in like manner as if they were na. lives, and that nei ber they, nor their heirs, or assigns shall, so far as respools the said lands and the legal remedies incident thereto, be considered as aliens." The defendant at the time of the action brought, still continued to be a British subject. Held, that he was entitled 10 hoid the lands so devised to him by G. C., “and transferred to him by E. c.

ERROR to the circuit court for the district of NewYork.

This was an action of ejectment commenced in the supreme court of the state of New York, and remov. ed thence into the circuit court of the United States, for the New-York district, whére, in September, 1815, a trial was had, and a special verdict found, in the words following, to wit :

At which day in this same court, at the city of New-York, in the New-York district, came the parties aforesaid, by their attorneys aforesaid, and the jurors aforesaid being called also coine, who to say the truth of the above contents, being elected, tried and sworn, say, upon their oath, that long before the above mentioned time, when the trespass and ejectment above mentioned, are supposed to have been committed, namely, on the tenth day of April, 1706, Anne, Queen of England, by letters patent under the great seal of the then colony of New York, did grant unto Sampson Broughton, and divers other persons in the said letters patent named, and their heirs, a certain tract of land, situate in the then colony, now state of New-York, to have and to hold the same to them, their heirs and assigns, forever, as tenants in common,

« AnteriorContinuar »