On Habeas Corpus of Negro Charles and Wife. In November Term, 1781. (p. 467.) ON the hearing of this Cafe, the Court adjudged in favor of the difeharge of the Negroes, and ordered the Defendant to deliver them to the Sheriff of Bergen, *14 to remain in his

b, ILbrtn Cerina fr 0!f IT '‘'ting a’lnWd bv the Cour.fel 'or the .. tl h teats lb1! the P'aiitt.if, that L.e is Ae Doughttr cf 3 certain jumter I cc, a ^ A pro chv. c. he-etc’ci e hviongi.ig to h.r.td Lee cf the Tour tfcv antes in the Cekiy of F Icuvdru ttts

The Court considered the whole proceedings to have been irregular; but said, that there could be no doubt of the sufficiency of the second reason alone, as a ground for setting them aside. And the Judgment was accordingly reversed.

To the Honorable the Senate of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts : 1 On the nineteenth day of April last the Honorable Senate adopted an order, which was transmitted on the next day to the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, requesting their opinion upon the

Cushing, C. J., instructed the jury that the objection taken to the admission of the deed, because the grantor had not acknowledged it, and because no evidence was offered of livery of seisin, was, in the opinion of the Court, unsupported by the law of the land

SUFFOLK, ■ This was an action of trespass quare clausum fregit. Issue not guilty. The defendants had hired the premises of the plaintiff for a year, terminating the 13th of April, 1779, and held over until the 20th of May following, notwithstanding being warned

It was objected that the plaintiff had proved a title to no more than three-fourths of the land in question ; that, as he had demanded the whole, he had failed in his proof. But, by the Chief Justice, and agreed by the Court, in ejectments the plaintiff shall recover

By the Court: The defendant must in this case, confess Lease Entry, and Ouster for the whole tenements laid in the declaration * . This case was determined at N. P Carlisle on the 16 May, 1785, before M'Kean, Chief Justice, &c.

By the Court. It is clear that the bill was neither paid nor received in satisfaction of the precedent debt, but upon the condition of its being honored: it has not been honored; consequently, the parties are in the same situation, as if it had never been drawn

M'Kean, Chief Justice. The Plaintiff states that the Defendants owe him £ 100, and in order to prove his allegation, he produces their bond, dated on the 5th of January, 1779, payable five years afterwards, that is, on the 5th of June, 1784. In answer to this

and now the Chief Justice stated the question, and delivered the opinion of the Court, in the following manner: M'Kean, Chief Justice. In this case the Executors of Zane had issued a Fieri facias against Joseph Wharton, to which the present Sheriff made return

the Chief Justice delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court to the following effect: M‘Kean, Chief Justice. The intestate had left seven children all under the age of fourteen years; their mother married the Baron appellant. Upon petition to the Orphan’s

By the Court: Let the judgment be reversed.

Upon the hearing before the Court, it appeared, that riwh i., My. hew, of MuiTuchufetts, by Deed . f if , dated t m frit Day of 'larch, 1750, did give a ;erta>ii Negro (⅛; called Flora, unto his Daughter, Lucy' Lithe, i a the Wire of Little — That the faid Lucy

On Habeas Corpus of Negro Obadiah Gale. THE Court having heard the Evidence and Argument of Counfel in this Caufe, do order that the ibid Jacob Phillips enter into Recognizance in the Sum of Ore Hundred Pounds, conditioned, that the faid Jacob Phillips on the

On Habeas Corpus for the hrinfmg r • a 1 7< grr> Man named Harry. ^ | "'HE Habeas Corpus being returned, the Court rro-JL ceeded to ccmiider the lame, and Con ¡el boüt it; favor of the Negro, and on behalf of the- llr-.l Daniel Taylor, Jun. being heard ; It is

The defendants’ anszver. That by virtue of an escheat warrant granted to William Rogers, to escheat a tract of Find called Bold Venture, dated the 27th of April, 1759, directed to the then deputy-surveyor of Baltimore county, the said surveyor did, on the 13th

M‘Kean, Chief Justice. The objection turns upon this principle, that the Defendant had no opportunity of cross-examining upon the former trial; and the answer is, that he, with the rest of the underwriters, had agreed to be bound by one verdict; which is certainly

The Chief Justice now delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court;—That the assignment by Joseph Parker to Joseph Lynn was not an assignment according to the act of assembly ( 1 State Laws 77.)but only a transfer of the equitable interest in the bond ; and that

The Court were of opinion, that the general power was sufficient for the purpose of the release; and, having directed the person acting under it, to enter an acknowledgment of satisfaction on the record, they ordered the Plaintiff to be discharged.