Sims Lessee v. Irvine
Decision Date | 19 February 1799 |
Citation | 3 Dall 425,1 L. Ed. 665,3 U.S. 425 |
Parties | <P><B><CENTER> Sims Leffe</CENTER></B></P> <P><B><CENTER>v.</CENTER></B></P> <P><B><CENTER>Irvine.</CENTER></B></P> |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Sims Leffe
v.
Irvine.
February Term 1799.
Error from the Circuit Court for the Pennsylvania District. An ejectment being instituted in the inferior Court, by the Leffee of Sims vs. Irvine, the Jury found a special verdict, upon which judgment was rendered for the Plaintiff, by consent, and this writ of error was brought to settle the title. The parts of the special verdict material to the points in controversy were, in substance, as follows.
PLAINTIFF'S TITLE.
'The Jury find that the premises in dispute was called Montour's Island, situated in the river Ohio, on the south-east side, within the original limits of the Virginia charter, granted in 1609, and within the limits of the territorial district in dispute between Virginia and Pennsylvania, for several years prior to the 23rd. of Sept. 1780, when those states entered into the following compact relative to their boundaries, as it is inserted in the Journals of the general Assembly of Pennsylvania; and afterwards ratified by a law passed the 1st. of April, 1784.' 2 vol. p. 207, Dallas's Edit.
'Resolved, That although the conditions annexed by the legislature of Virginia, to the ratification of the boundary line agreed to by the commissioners of Pennsylvania and Virginia, on the thiry-first day of August, 1779, may tend to countenance some unwarrantable claims, which may be made under the state of Virginia, in consequence of pretended purchases, or settlements pending the controversy, yet this state, determining to give to the world the most unequivocal proof of their desire to promote peace and harmony with a sister state, so necessary during this great contest against the common enemy, do agree to the conditions proposed by the state of Virginia, in their resolves of the 23rd of June last; to wit,'
'And we do hereby accept and fully ratify the said recited condition, and the boundary line formed thereupon.'
'The Jury find that William Douglas was a field officer in the service of the king of Great Britain, in a regiment raised in the colony of New Jersey, who continued in service during the war between France and Great Britain, which terminated in 1763; and that the said king gave to him, his heirs and assigns by proclamation, a right to 5000 acres of waste and unappropriated lands in America; the part of the proclamation relating to the gift being expressed in these words:
'And whereas we are desirous upon all occasions, to restify our royal sense and approbation of the conduct and bravery of the officers and soldiers of our armies, and to reward the same, we do hereby command and empower our governors of our said three new colonies, and other our governors of our several provinces on the continent of North America, to grant, without fee, or reward to such reduced officers as having served in North America, during the late war, and are actually residing there, and shall personally apply for the same, the following quantities of land, subject, at the expiration of ten years, to the same quit-rents as other lands are subject to in the province within which they are granted, as also subject to the same conditions of cultivation and improvement:' viz.
'To every person having the rank of a field officer, 5000 acres.'
'To every captain, 3000 acres.'
'To every subaltern of staff officer, 2000 acres.'
'To every non-commission officer, 200 acres.'
'To every private, 50 acres.'
'We do, likewise, authorize and require the governors and commanders in chief of all our said colonies upon the continent of North America, to grant the like quantities of land, and upon the same conditions, to such reduced officers of our navy of like rank, as served on board our ships of war in North America, at the times of the reduction of Louisoung, and Quebec in the late war, who shall personally apply to our respective governors, for such grants.'*
'The Jury find that the said W. Douglas, for a valuable consideration assigned on the 17th. of January 1779, to Charles Sims, and his heirs, all his right and title to the said bounty of 5000 acres of land; that C. Sims was born in Virginia, before the year 1760; that he was an inhabitant thereof since his birth; that he is the lessor of the Plaintiff and a citizen of Virginia; that William Irvine, the Defendant below, is a citizen and inhabitant of Pennsylvania; and that the lands mentioned in the declaration exceed the value of 2000 dollars.'
The Jury find, in bac verba, a law of Virginia enacted in May 1779, entitled 'An Act, for adjusting and settling the titles of claimers to unpatented lands, under the present, and former government, previous to the establishment of the Commonwealth's Land-Office;' the material parts of which law are expressed in the following terms:
'An Act for adjusting and settling the titles of claimers, to unpatented lands under the present and former Government, previous to the establishment of the Commonwealth's Land-Office.'
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lockhart v. United States
...Court has applied the rule from our earliest decisions to our more recent. See, e.g., Sims Lessee v. Irvine, 3 Dall. 425, 444, n., 1 L.Ed. 665 (1799) ; FTC v. Mandel Brothers, Inc., 359 U.S. 385, 389, n. 4, 79 S.Ct. 818, 3 L.Ed.2d 893 (1959) ; Barnhart, 540 U.S., at 26, 124 S.Ct. 376. The r......
-
Lockhart v. United States, 14–8358.
...Court has applied the rule from our earliest decisions to our more recent. See, e.g., Sims Lessee v. Irvine, 3 Dall. 425, 444, n., 1 L.Ed. 665 (1799) ; FTC v. Mandel Brothers, Inc., 359 U.S. 385, 389, n. 4, 79 S.Ct. 818, 3 L.Ed.2d 893 (1959) ; Barnhart, 540 U.S., at 26, 124 S.Ct. 376. The r......
-
Yahoo Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA
...S.Ct. 818, 3 L.Ed.2d 893 ), and it was mentioned by the high court as early as 1799 (see 301 Cal.Rptr.3d 13 Sims' Lessee v. Irvine (1799) 3 U.S. 425, 444, 3 Dall. 425, 1 L.Ed. 665, fn. * ). In California, reliance on the last antecedent rule dates back at least a century. As formulated by t......
-
Yahoo Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA
...385, 389–390, 79 S.Ct. 818, 3 L.Ed.2d 893 ), and it was mentioned by the high court as early as 1799 (see Sims' Lessee v. Irvine (1799) 3 U.S. 425, 444, 3 Dall. 425, 1 L.Ed. 665, fn. * ). In California, reliance on the last antecedent rule dates back at least a century. As formulated by thi......
-
A theory of adjudication: law as magic.
...talisman by whose magic powers the whole fabric which law has erected respecting corporations is at once dissolved"); Sims Leffe v. Irvine, 3 U.S. 425, 454 (1799) ("[T]here is no magic in the description of a (10.) See generally OSCAR G. CHASE, LAW CULTURE AND RITUAL: DISPUTING SYSTEMS IN C......