Page:United States Reports, Volume 1.djvu/21

 10  Trial, nor dicharge the Defendant from Bail, without ome appearance of oppreion. 

LAINTIFF upported his Title by a Patent dated in 1762. The Defendant produced Receipts from the Proprietary’s Officers, with a Warrant from Mr. Peters, Secretary of the Land Office, everal Years prior to Plaintiff’s Patent, and proved upwards of twenty Years Poeion; but the Plaintiff contending that the Receipts were only for Money paid on accompt of an adjacent Tract, and that there was ome impoition on the Land Officer when the Warrant was granted; the Defendant produced a Witnes to prove a parol Declaration of Mr. Thomas Penn (when he was in the Country) that the Land in dipute was old to Defendant.–This piece of Evidence was oppoed by the Plaintiff, and refued.

N.B The Plaintiff could prove no impoition on the Officer, and the Court gave a Charge in favour of the Defendant, and the Plaintiff would not take the Verdict, but became nonuit. 

UR Policy of Inurance. The Captain’s Protet in Jamaica under the Seal of a Notary Publick there, given in Evidence to prove the Capture, and not oppoed.

Intructions from the Plaintiffs (Owners of the Veel inured) to the Captain af the Time of his ailing, worn by the Captain to be the only Intructions he had, were given in Evidence by the Plaintiffs, to prove they had given the Captain no Orders to buy the Veel on their account in cae of a capture and re-capture, lightly oppoed by Defendants Council, and given up without debate.

The Defendant in this cae underwrote an open Policy on the Veel from Philadelphia to Jamaica, he was taken by the Enemy and ret kenretaken [sic], and carried into Jamaica, where by Agreement between the Captain and Re-captors, without going into the Court of Admiralty, he was old at public Sale for about one fourth of the Sum inured, and brought by the Captain for the former Owners, who afterwards acquieced in the purchae, and now ued for the whole Sum inured as a total los. The Sale was proved to be fair, and the Plaintiff’s Council inited that from the moment of the Capture, there was a tot ltotal [sic] los, and cited divers caes to hew, that if there be a Capture, though it be not uch a one as by the Law of Nations would change the Property, yet it would be ufficient to charge Underwriters with a total Los, and the Aured may abandon.–Beaws Lex Mer. 268. Conyngham 225. 259. 300. 340. On