Difference between revisions of ".MzYwOTY.MTI4Mzg4"

From Transcribe Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Protected ".MzYwOTY.MTI4Mzg4" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)))
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 10:37, 5 August 2021

Johnson vs. Victor: Notes by Pltff's Counsel. The aspect under which Bibb is presented to the court, is that of a purchaser with notice of the existence of a trust in favor of infants; that description of cestuy que trusts which are termed "the peculiar favorites of equity". "Infants are not to be prejudiced by the lackes of their trustees." 3 Bac: ab.587. "It is not supposed, that a possession commencing during the infancy of a pltff, can operate a title in favor of a defendant, until such possession had continued 5 years after his infancy had ceased." Hudson vs Hudson 6 Man:352. These authorities seem to me to silence the objection to our title growing out of Barbour's possession. With regard to the sale by Johnson the trustee, to Harding, "a sale & conveyance by a trustee is void, if the requisitions of the deed of trust have not been complied with." Taylor vs King 6 Mun 358. A circumstance tending to prove that Harding was accessory to the fraud practised by Johnson is that he bound himself not to sell the slaves in question near Fred'g: a condition strictly performed. In relation to the gift at the marriage proved by Richd Johnson, "No gift of slaves is valid unless by deed in writing proved by two witnesses & duly recorded; except where the slaves have remained in the possession of the donee." 1 Rev: Co: 432.§.51. The length of time requisite to vest a title in the donee is not specified in the act; we are therefore to presume that his possession ought to continue till the commencement of a controversy; or by analogy to other questions in respect to slaves that it should be of 5 years duration. In the present case the donee's possession did not continue till the origin of the cause which occasioned this suit; nor is it proved to have endured five years. The gift is not attempted to be proved by two witnesses, but by only one, it is not by an authenticated deed, but by parol; not accompanied by delivery of possession in the presence of the affiant; and probably limited in its extent at the time of its perfection.