Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/127

EODGDON V. BUSLBIGH. 113 �Before the survey, the parties who should establish their claims were entitled to a certificate, stating they were en- titled to receive the 200 acres, -which certificate was declared to be conclusive evidence of their right to receive the convey- ance, in fee-simple, of one of said lots, whenever the same should be sarveyed. By a resolve approved March 18, 1840, township No. 8, the subject-matter of the present suit, was appropriated, in lieu of letter D, to satisfy the holders of cer- tificates for Iota issued by the land agent under the former resolves. Where the holders had not selected lots and re- ceived their deeds, the land agent was required to have town- ship No. 8 surveyed into lots of 200 acres, and to distribute the same by draft among the holders of such certificates. Commissioned officers and their widows were to receive 600 acres in three lots. Under this resolve the township was surveyed. A plan was made by Thomas Sawyer, Jr., and ac- cording to his plan and survey the whole township was divided into 108 lots, of about 200 acres each. Five of these lots were set apart for public uses. These lots are dis- claimed by the tenants. AU the lots in the township, except those reserved for public uses,, were assigned by draft to the holders of the certificates, as provided in the resolves before referred to, and the record of the drawing of the lots was kept by the land agent in his office. �In the years 1841, 1845, and 1850, respectively, the legis- lature fixed the state valuation by resolves, which are Verba- tim with each other, and of which the f ollowing is a copy : �"Resolved, That the number of poils and amount of estates annexed to the several towns and plantations in the several counties, and the aggregate of the several counties in the fore- going schedule, be and the same are hereby established as the number of poils and valuation of estates, of taxable poils and estates of this state, untilthe further order of the legislature." �The schedule referred to in the resolves contained the fol- lowing entry, which is the only entry claimed to be pertinent to this case, viz. : l'or 1841 : �v.4,no.2— 8 ����