Stanley v. Turner, 3 N.C. 306, 2 Hayw. 306 (1804)

June 1804 · North Carolina Superior Court

3 N.C. 306, 2 Hayw. 306

Stanley vs. Turner.

Ejectment.

THE question here was, whether a naked possession for seven years in the defendant, unaccompanied with any color-able title, would bar this action of ejectment.

Counselfor the defendant.

I have understood from old and yc"y respectable practises, that in ancient times, and until with-la this few years, a naked possession for seven years had al= W-- been deemed a good title sti ejectment, either to bar the ph'iuifF, if the possession had been against him, or to recove" upon, if it bad been with him. The second clause in the wefi of limitations, has a prospective view, and regards cases arising» af-er the act, as well as before» I. was not by that clause {!.< s naked possession required an entrv to defeat it. After the coa» Srmation of imperfect titles, the next thing considered is a ciass. v>F cases in which there ;s no colorable title $ and there the entry ©fitina who Uas title, is required to ue made within seven years. If it were intended to make it unnecessary to enter upon a linked possession, the legislature having just before spoken oí co-lorable titles, world have introduced the same idea here. Taeir omission is a proof thai they did not mu nd it. Tet it lie admitted that the second clause respected ‘-.listing or past cases ¿ then as to future ones, this act is to be construed as if the se-nnd clause «rere not in it — And then what becomes of the idea of colorable title that is not spoken of or hinted at in any part of the third or fourth clauses 2 The third clause is that which ¡requires aa entry to be made. It respects the titles of those persons, who are out of possession. The one clause is for con* inning tides ; the other is for defeating the m by possession. Will it follow, that because an imperfect title, with seven years pcs-cescsion, is rendered valid — .-that thcrefoie an entry need not fog *n«de against any other possession than one accompanied wit'"» ti color of title ? T his third cLu'.e of an act, is word for word j the same as the English statute of James, except that in our's fee word claim is added to that of entry : the objects of both were the siae for quieting metis estates. Ho colour of title is necessary under that act; and if it be under cures, it must b¡ fos-eóme verj cogesti; reason to warrant such a difference .ii awn ü.. r:t tite act itself. And as colorable title is not spoken of in the third and fourth clauses of cur act, I cannot perceive how it cat?, be inferred from either of the cl.au.ses that colour of title Is necessary.

Seawexx, c contra.”

-The reasoning employed its the appendix to Judge Taylor’s Keports, is not answered nor obviated by what has just fallen from the gentlemen for thr defendant: and in addition to that reasoning, other arguments of considerable! weight are to be drawn from the title and preamble of the act,. If we ask what were the objects cf th¡v: act, the title answers, ^ old tides of lands and the body of the act gives preference to that old title which has possession in its favor. The poss-'s-siom therefore inrroducí d, by the set, is that which is intended to establish an c!d title. How could disputes tbout these «.¡d titles, exist, concerning which the act was made ? Ho otherwise than by aaeans of opposite dados derived frota sarnie sovirss ÍMepcntltr.t-o£ •p'T’.-*. ron í — -ir. oihor vcyo-c, ¿y rr-c. ^í. of ,t, o- or romane con-vny»n¡vs muí* • titees* 'XI f wnV <.», d»Ht ihe oíd tutes «pniu« ot in the titie <ú tV.ft ací, »•«? vt»»*e 4i«A;n oí and cntUnd ’.a «,'t second cianea oí the ¿.el which respected them only ; bm if o'u* opponents wil! ín>;,$U'po» t» íuntre u-i,.ra-ica for the second clause* tí*».. ’• wf insir.; by way of a: i.-uiarnr, tb.t if the second cían» e baa su-u operation, the poasoe* ion ro Le c.’oidrd by entry, musí be a possersioa connected with some of dic.se old Htk-e : for v/iiy mention them at ail, if the purnosea of the act Led not a coai-cK-ion with them 1

Another argument may be drawn from the terms of the pie— ambls: It expresses that tita act is it:..tie,for quieting otera's ec* taies. Mowt-~By possession. There an estate which ñecos confirmation, is n, ueconfirmed by possession.- — And Low could that estate arise at the period of passing this at.» ? L * * «uleí nofc he an «state acquir. d ¡jy pi-sressi'-a j for then these was r.o need oí í.he act* it bcíoi e n, an estate could be acquired by possession., It must have been as. tziJts then, acquired by some colorable itioaris. It is very tras our third Ha use is nenaod like the act ot James, except «. ••It the difference pointtd out?. but in tbs fourth ciau-te, i’i.ur n, something which baa ¿to ;U;r.;,s an úit &w, of Jumes ; hut that all possessions held without seeing such Csdíaa as aforesaid shall be a perpetua! bar against :.!1 and al* man» rer of persons whatsoever 5 that the 4t expectation of heirs romp a not in a short time ¡¡save much hind unfjcs&ci.sed, andtmes coper-44 flexed that nd one tj ill know of whom to tale or buy lands. £i:i 41 that all possessions ¡Uld,m See. joV — is an immediate ami u ide ¿ii. ference between tbs two nets. Under the act oí james there is no enquiry made respecúng1 the possession of the dsfetsdixt, but on ir.e contrary it is, whether the pkúnx:'fjfhas possess» ccl within the dire required; Bulb K. F 102. But by these words of our act, he need not enter at all unless an actual posses» sior. ia held against hita. Ayairs, the act supposes that nnltsa po.Ev-usSiOEi were allowed to oredure the effects intended, the crept-» «tuon of heirs would leave nr-tvcS:knd unpossessed, and sms* midi pet picx-sd. How cculc mis pi rplexity arise i Could it arise at the period wh*a the ac> .'peebs, but by mean;, «f di’ks for the SK.ie lauda int-iffej em y~-i sons. Ii tide v. as f L,; pe;pies» iiy te be shaani.iL mm if pcstussiou is the mean *doi>icda than i; a title supp.u ccd by possei-sion was meant to be rendered suptnor 10 a ¿rile wiíbout su These semuncts issstrted in out act tat-ut notbiag ii dr. legislature intended after were added, UírS the .«ct sbculd have the same í.t.xiStJiutíon. as if would without than; that is to say, tl.-r asme conrtrucUoa as was given to the act w‘ j.'jmus vdiich hsd. thesis nt>t« i>'s h aqaimsg the rules oí cspoaiúo.? to they meant nodiing. ,hty w*v„.i eoritethii.g, and that diSisren*- <r’m what the Kitacic^ v.v.u.'« iwvc b«*'?4 widitut tbetisj o«»f act seáli) docs difict toc¿ •J'.t sc* of í ?a :wir'd znú nseasáng, rad it onbr "c~ j'fr- to £ isuvc: wL.V, L :r cvu* if they c.i<5; ure ■■••. ,!>'-„•».•7S a r/r1'' f'-j;'. wvw c^-muísk b«s«; ib^fi vif>c>> ve heve * 'r'í» ZC-:t tb-iFili H < „• s ífj, thií M'.r pSrj.V'Ni.y ..?> ilusó 'wiUcu Í.S diD gr.'c J t fya oí ;La a-:, w ,CsV‘a:, w.; clvvl] ;o ario-; by ;•■ ';ac* :y\.rz' 2ES*ir tiiaij by cbifersuv titles ¿cr rh .■ c .&:e Srit-Jí ¿a (. fferwr. ptiifaou;,that ¡.oaeecsiun mízi icrcelea 151 cs.rs v/.-voe '> i v-ach gcy.-Crby .v¿ tide Cfiiikl ss-ke, f>3 bo 1. '¿¿5’x-y couidi m’-.j vh,,\ o flv.r. via. ca" oac grcFt. zaú hoi’ sei ».» m sw ccr > vayas ■«..to So* rh. ...me ¡ml ou ride, aad ü„MÜr£ fever, wtked yxs -is ;.m c;:\. -ho y>ji-

Wv ü.í'.a, ,-..i..'-',b issba, as la.t.ly broached., red arqn» iiiv-Ar. ioAVif'<5 '>■>» ?>„ YLc* ■ii-ulu: < hu^.. :c avid to bz ■. prow, <s sii míí »'» iv¡. ,. cuija «v uív sLi«ü That dure.; o 5 id raw v if „ > '.it myicC ‘rom úu opwradoa oí the at cos.d ciaran l : «a ;.... r¡ g 'iiv-.i.- as, tíu-y are ínua ib- fust, ir ¡Wy ca-ler wsVttia t,... t,jvR« twE \ . 5 ‘•o thesu !.y hit- proviso j a.ih L?jtj!‘ví..n' ti s-. Flu í.-'cíi.í. h?. aic. k-in the spt-v,"vk; mo vt-ooncc.. f'i i «•viv.,r: .. .5:: «.L. oc u-hfu up>.n. What cheii ? 1. 11 Le a piv/i *,.i» . , .¿/-zb ••:» ’«v-cs. ihat pjove tlias a ce'our oZ t.’.J.1 ir , . v.¡afj. i Á*i t.u. cm oal} is, that the aushor oí the v.pvwSi :>jZ t./av iatoritct ia fibc ; >»■ :< .v.l-.v A ’tule ireilcr> w-ia aowsvcu will deau>8sm>tet tl.ai the p.iw.'v h not s.a «reap. Cun to the seeoad cka-«.. í'he ^tovko <<p£‘.a\,v ,v. »© e.y.,.eyth c.o of ceiu/u paysoi.s who atliei vitic would üs t «.«isiprebersded N. [5;e getiiit-ti terats of the act, and ir, coaceras perica, tv ho are uh.k of ro.<retvto::. iad, are to s.-cgoH& k by enny or cI-hsu I> asvily» '¿ie?(iíj;:vy h ait exception ci cettain pesaotic, ir».*®*. oecol soate g'.iK'cú ck.aae, reqairieg theh* entry by a la'aH,e,c Uma, The ceeiSEd clause doe.v not, ¡require any entry, ®or si all .reRCc.s persor’j:? out of pa&Fissíovs» It resy-eels thc¿e tsffi’iy who ers h\ posoctsio::, i«r the purpose of oonSunaiag their Picks. I’Jjcic: who are out of po&eeestcn are not comprehended » the gcaer^ik ty of iar tetiiitr, utt»I eoase^ueedy cannot be wishra the proviso ad«. •üed by v.vay vsí civtepúoa to soaie cLuac which does comprehend theta. CrtiipMy «rlmt the escobó danto aays with tbs yrnvic» udded, it w::i tura cut thus: al! persons in passesaien, skcll have & food title eiceept femes covert, Sfc- who a*e tut ofpvasemon s ci u.iw.i tUlpeesom in pessessswt ¿hell. Hess a good tifie* crece ir, femes coved,, who though In possession, hie the otueirs cmrrere,'A-iC. ed hi 1 'he clause* shad outer £0 aequstep&ssession wsinin ¿knee yea ■ ,s* «fiar Sscoveriure* &fu. Sut why khor oh use other aid. -.o p -avs tUir, posiúoní Stití our strong bold remains, it r.i.y & ÜL be dvav/a íru« die expricbiuRs of ibe p'.on:oah'tadv avicu. ch :í the owtry »jv cldwn p> in be C2esrí¡*d against a >y v *e»£, '>n erw .v- ^ p.wtcJi v/trís c.Four «f i'íi/^ ¿Jpoa ibis e%prcr»>oa ’« lire _ " •'■>'.1 cl coltiif tfiiil,; e, £? h iu xkúíí í ? it- wine out little inaccuracies in the appendix, if they do not affect the; argument raised on the ground we mention.

Adjoumutuu