10 D.C. 440 (D.C.D.C. 1879), 14,036, Walker v. The Potomac Ferry Co.

Docket NºAT LAW.— 14,036.
Citation10 D.C. 440
Party NameJOHN WALKER AND JAMES WALKER v. THE POTOMAC FERRY COMPANY AND SAMUEL BACON.
AttorneyJ. W. Moore and George H. Paschal , for plaintiffs. Davidge & Washington , for defendants.
CourtSupreme Court of District of Columbia

Page 440

10 D.C. 440 (D.C.D.C. 1879)

JOHN WALKER AND JAMES WALKER

v.

THE POTOMAC FERRY COMPANY AND SAMUEL BACON.

AT LAW.— No. 14,036.

Supreme Court, District of Columbia.

September Term, 1879

In an action of ejectment, the plea set forth that plaintiff's title was derived through their mother, still living, who was an alien and was sister to the intestate, and that defendants claim under the heirs of an uncle of the intestate who was capable of taking real estate by inheritance. On demurrer to the plea, it was held that the heirs of the uncle had the better legal right, and that the plaintiff could not derive title by descent from an alien living mother.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE.

This was ejectment brought by the plaintiff for the possession of a certain piece or parcel of land in the city of Washington, and a count is added to recover the rents and profits. The controversy turns upon the facts alleged in the third special plea, which reads as follows:

" And for a further plea the defendants say that James Dixon, late of this District, died intestate on or about the 26th of January, 1858, seized and possessed in fee-simple of the real estate in the declaration mentioned; that the said James Dixon was a natural-born subject of the crown of Great Britain and Ireland, and emigrated from Scotland, the place of his birth, to this District on or about the year 1827, and having duly complied with the provisions of law relating to naturalization, was, on or about the 26th day of January, in the year 1839, duly naturalized and admitted to all the rights and privileges of a citizen of the United States, and that the said real estate whereof he died seized and possessed as aforesaid was purchased by him after said naturalization; that the said James Dixon left surviving him no child or descendant; that his relatives in blood at his decease were a sister and her descendants, the plaintiffs, being children of said sister, and the descendants of a deceased uncle; that said sister was an alien, a natural-born subject of said crown, and was incapable of taking said real estate by descent, and that her said descendants, the plaintiffs, although they had been naturalized at the time of the death of said James Dixon, were likewise incapable of deriving title by descent through a living alien, (or to take because their mother, an alien, was then living,) and that the said descendants of the deceased uncle of said James Dixon were...

To continue reading

Request your trial