Hugh Patton, Administrator and Hugh Patton and Others, Heirs of Robert Patton, Deceased Appellants v. James Taylor, Administrator and James Taylor, John Tibbatts and Ann His Wife, George Williamson and Jane His Wife, and Horatio Harris and Keturah His Wife, Heirs of James Taylor, Deceased

Decision Date01 January 1849
Citation48 U.S. 132,12 L.Ed. 637,7 How. 132
PartiesHUGH M. PATTON, ADMINISTRATOR, AND HUGH M. PATTON AND OTHERS, HEIRS OF ROBERT PATTON, DECEASED, APPELLANTS, v. JAMES TAYLOR, ADMINISTRATOR, AND JAMES TAYLOR, JOHN W. TIBBATTS AND ANN W. HIS WIFE, GEORGE T. WILLIAMSON AND JANE M. HIS WIFE, AND HORATIO T. HARRIS AND KETURAH L. HIS WIFE, HEIRS OF JAMES TAYLOR, DECEASED
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

'Sir,—At the time you forwarded me the deed for the land I bought of you in the county of Hopkins, patented to Thos. Gaskins, you sent me nothing to show how the title had passed to you. The land is listed on the auditor's books for taxes in the name of Thomas Southcombe, and for a number of years I have paid the taxes in his name for you. When your son, Hugh M. Patton, your agent, was here, I inquired of him how you derived your title from Southcombe, and whether he had a regular conveyance from Gaskins. He told me that you had some kind of transfer from Southcombe for all his debts, lands, &c., but did not seem to know much about it, but promised me, immediately on his getting home, to inform you of my uneasiness and doubts whether the chain of title was perfect, and to notify me, and indeed to request of you to send me a copy of the different conveyances, or, if they were in this county, to inform me where they could be found. I have not had a line from either of you since his return. I also consider myself very badly treated on another score. Your son had drawn a bill for $300, in favor of Talbott, of Lexington, on which he procured Mr. Talbott to be indorser; and, to indemnify him for doing so, he had lodged with him my bond to you for the first payment of the said land. Your son wished to get the bond released, and requested of me to give Mr. Talbott a guarantee that the bill should be duly honored. This I did not hesitate to do. A few weeks ago I received a notification from the F. and M. Bank of Lexington, that the bill, although accepted by you, had been returned to the bank protested for non-payment; and I am called on by Mr. Talbott to take up the bill, and relieve him. I made every exertion in my power, when your son was here, to aid him in discharging a debt due here, which was in the hands of Mr. Talbott for collection, and was largely in advance for your taxes in this State and Ohio. The times, as to a good circulating medium, are truly embarrassing; but, had I been sure the title to the land sold me had been secure, I could have made sales to have met the payments, or nearly so; but I have been deterred from selling one acre, although offered the specie funds for a considerable purchase. Taking the whole transaction together, I must confess it is not such as I expected from Mr. Robert Patton of Fredericksburg. If there had been any little defect in the title to this land, which can be removed, and I had been notified of it and had it explained, I should not have been disposed to throw difficulties in the way, if there was a prospect to have any difficulty removed. When I go up, I shall have the records examined, and, if no chain of title can be found, I shall refuse to pay any more money till these difficulties are removed. I am sure you cannot think I am acting incorrectly in the course I am about to pursue. I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

JAMES TAYLOR.

'ROBERT PATTON, ESQ.'

On the 29th of February, 1820, Taylor addressed to Patton the following letter:——

'Washington City, February 29, 1820.

'ROBERT PATTON, ESQ.:——

'Sir:—I wrote you from Newport, Ky., last fall, requesting information whether the conveyances had been regular from the original patentee, Thos. Gaskins, for the two thousand acres of land sold me by you, lying in Hopkins county, on the waters of Pogue's Creek, and which I understood you purchased of Thos....

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Williams v. Neely
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 18 Noviembre 1904
    ......Neely and others. as sureties, executed a bond in the penal sum ... Williams paid this $2,000, and he and his wife made a note. and a mortgage upon the property ... . . J. H. Broady, for appellants. . . William. Baird (John C. ...565; Quick v. Lemon, 105 Ill. 578;. Taylor v. Stowell, 4 Metc. (Ky.) 175; Forbes v. ... possession. Patton v. Taylor, 7 How. 133, 159, 12. L.Ed. 637; ......
  • Moser v. Pugh-Jenkins Furniture Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • 22 Junio 1918
    ...... Fla. 510, 14 Ann. Cas. 365, 45 So. 35; Patton v. Taylor, 48 U.S. 132, 12 L.Ed. 637-650; Noonan ......
  • Forster v. Flack
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 3 Junio 1909
    ...Wis. 427, 55 N. W. 764;Clementson v. Streeter, 59 Wis. 429, 18 N. W. 340;Falkner v. Woodard, 104 Wis. 608, 80 N. W. 940;Patton v. Taylor, 48 U. S. 132, 12 L. Ed. 637;Kelley v. Kelley, 80 Wis. 486, 50 N. W. 334;Deery v. McClintock, 31 Wis. 195.McGee & Jeger, for appellant.Blatchley & Gilbert......
  • Moores v. Tomlinson
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • 10 Abril 1916
    ...306, 83 N.W. 245; Paulson v. Ward, 4 N.D. 103, 58 N.W. 792; Rundle v. Delaware & R. Canal Co. 14 How. 100, 14 L.Ed. 343; Patton v. Taylor, 7 How. 132, 12 L.Ed. 637; v. Bonesteel, 16 Wall. 16, 32, 21 L.Ed. 268, 271. A bill of sale as security is good. McCormick Harvester Mach. Co. v. Caldwel......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT