1767.
September Term 1767.
| Preſent William Allen, Chief Juſtice. | |
| William Coleman, | Juſtices. |
| John Lawrence, | |
| Thomas Willins, | |
Bœhm and Shitz verſus Andrew Engle.
Action on the Caſe for £802. The Plaintiffs under a power in the Will of Henry Bolſter deceaſed, had ſold at public vendue to the Defendant, a houſe and lot in the city of Philadelphia for £802, and ſhortly after tendered him a Deed for it, which the Defendant refuſed to accept, being adviſed by council that Bolſter had no good Title to the Lot.—Upon which the Plaintiffs brought a ſpecial Action on the caſe for the conſideration Money.
On the Trial, in ſupport of Bolſter’s title, the Plaintiffs produced a Patent to Jane Batchelor dated 1694, and a Deed from one Richard Tucker (who had married Jane Batchelor) to John Chambers dated 1685, and deduced a regular title from Chambers down to Bolſter. The Plaintiffs acknowledged the defect in the Title, in Tucker’s conveying his Wife’s Eſtate without her joining in the Deed, but inſiſted on ſixty Years Poſſeſſion as giving a good Title under the Statue of 32 H. 8. c. 2.
The Council for the Defendant denied the extenſion of that Statue, and urged that if the 32 H. 8. extended, the Statue of 21 Ja. 1. c. 16. likewiſe extended, being both made before the Settlement of the Province, but it appears to have been the Opinion of the Legiſlature of this Province, that theſe Statutes of Limitations did not extend, by their having made an Act to limit perſonal Actions in the very Words of the Statute of James.[1] It was likewiſe contended on the Part of the Defendant, that though the Statute of 32 H. 8. ſhould be extended, yet this Caſe was not within it; because, 1ſt The Act was made on a preſumption that there might have been regular Conveyances and loſt, but there it appears there was no Conveyance at all from the Wife by Tucker’s granting for himſelf and his Wife.–2d. There is no Proof of ſixty Years Poſſeſſion, the Witneſſes for the Plaintiff ſpeaking only to 44 Years back.–3d. The Act of 32 H. 8. does not operate unleſs ſixty Years elapſed ſince Right of Entry accrued, and here Tucker’s Wife had no Right of Entry till the Death of her Huſband, which was in 1708 and not ſixty Years ago. There was another point made for the Defendant, that in one of the meſne Conveyances, about ſixteen Years ago, the Wives of the Grantors had not joined in the Deed, and were now living, and conſequently might be limited to Dower.
- ↑ 12 Ann. c. 2. ſee 1 State Laws 69 and 1 Geo. 1. c. 8. ſ 6. ſee 1 State Laws 72.
