1767.
For the Plaintiffs it was answered, that in 2 Peere Williams 75. and many other cases, it was settled that all Acts of Parliament made before the Settlement of the Colony extend, unless local in their Nature; that under this rule the Statute of Wills, Statute of Uses, and many other Statutes, were always held to extend; and that the reason of this Act extended as well as any other. That as to this Case not being within the Act, the presumption spoken of was not justified by the Act itself, which extended to every Case—2d. Though the Witnesses swear only to forty-four Years possession, yet after such a length of time it should be presumed the possession had been from the Date of the Deed to Chambers, which was in 1685.—3d. The Rights of Femes Covert are not saved in this Act (except such Femes Covert as were in being at the time of making the Act) and Possession was out of Tucker’s Wife from the time of her Husband’s Deed to Chambers.—As to the last Point it was said, that it was picked up at the Bar, and objected to at the Time of tendering the Deed; that it did not strictly go to the title, but was only a claim of two old Women for their Lives, which the Jury might take notice of, it they pleased, by lessening the Damages.
The Court were unanimous and clear in their Opinion, that the Act of 32 H. 8. did extend to this Province, and gave it in charge to the Jury accordingly.[1]
The Verdict of the Jury was unconformable to this opinion, by their finding for the Plaintiffs, having made an allowance for the Lives of the Women in the Damages.
April Term, 1768.
| William Allen, Chief Justice. | |
| John Lawrence, | Justices. |
| Thomas Willing, | |
Riche and Richards versus Broadfield.
An Account of Sales of an Adventure shipt to New-York, said to be signed by the Factor, offered in evidence to prove a loss on the Goods. Objected, that the Factor himself ought to have been brought to give evidence, viva voce, or at least the account should have been proved by him, and certified under the City Seal of New-York, agreeably, to the directions of the act of parliament with reward to the proving Colony debts in England.–Answered, That this being a Mercantile Transaction, such Evidence as Merchants usually admit as proofs of a foreign Transaction, should be received here.
- ↑ See S. P. Morris’s versus Vanderen Post.
By
