Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/698

 ^M FEDERAL BBFO&TEB. �the cliancellor on the merits, it was held that any subse- quent suit would not be entertained, and tHat the court would presume, from the long acquiescence of ail parties in the action of the executors, that the estate had been finally and properly settled. �In McKnight v. Taylor, 1 How. 161, it was held by the supreme court of the United States that, in matters of account not barred by the statute of limitations, courts of equity may refuse to interfere, after a considerable lapse of time, from considerations of public policy and from the difûculty of doing entire justice, ■where the original transactions have become obscure by time, and the evidence may be lost. �In Badger v. Badger, 2 Wall. 89, the same court, in hold- ing that, except in certain cases, courts of equity will, acting on their inherent doctrine of discouraging, for the peace of Bociety, antiquated demands, refuse to interfere in attempts to estal?lish state trusts, remarked, at page 94: "There is a defence, peculiar to courts of equity, founded upon the lapse of time and the staleness of the daim, where no statute of limitations governs the case. In such cases, * * * courts of equity refuse to interfere where there bas been gross laches in prosecuting the claim, or long acquiesence in the assertion of adverse rights. Long acquiescence and laches by parties out of possession are productive of much hardship and injustice to otbers, and cannot be exoused but by showing some actual hindranoe or impediment, caused by the fraud or concealment of the party in possession, which will appeal to the conscience of the chancellor." Important learning on the general subject may also be found in Brown v.Brown, 95 U. S. 161; Goddin v. Kimmell, 99 U. S. 211 ; and Wood V. Carpenter, 101 U. S. 235. �The case at bar, if it falls within any class of cases which have been described, and of which examples bave been cited in the foregoing review, falls within that alluded to in the case of Badger v. Badger last cited, where the long acquies- cence of the parties claiming rights, in the action of those against whom they claim, bas created a presumption that they have abandoned their rights, and where the enforcement ����