# Greenleaf's Lessee v. Birth (30 U.S. 132)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
30 U.S. 132
Greenleaf's Lessee v. Birth
ERROR to the circuit court of the district of Columbia, for the county of Washington.
The lessee of James Greenleaf instituted an action of ejectment in the circuit court for the county of Washington, for the recovery of lot No. 16 in Square No. 75, in the city of Washington, which suit was afterwards removed to the county of Alexandria, and was there tried in the circuit court.
Upon the trial the plaintiff gave in evidence certain duly authenticated copies of deeds, commencing in date on the 18th of June 1791, and of the allotment of the lot in question to James Greenleaf, by the commissioners of the United States, under the authority of the act of congress of 16th July 1790, establishing 'a temporary and permanent seat of the government of the United States.' Upon this evidence the plaintiff prayed the court to give certain instructions to the jury in favour of the title and possession of the lessor of the plaintiff, which were refused, and which refusal was made the ground of separate bills of exceptions. Subsequently the plaintiff gave in evidence a regular chain of title from the lord proprietor of the province of Maryland, and a good title in the lessor of the plaintiff, in the month of October 1794. The case on the part of the plaintiff was by this evidence relieved from the difficulties presented by the evidence which was offered in the first instance, and out of which arose the exceptions taken to the refusal of the court to give instructions upon that evidence.
The plaintiff also offered in evidence the survey, certificates, plots and explanations returned in this cause, and offered to prove that nineteen and a quarter acres were truly located on the plot by the lines designated by the letters E. s. g.; that the deed from Benjamin Stoddart to Gant and Beall, and the deed from Benjamin Stoddart and Uriah Forrest to James Greenleaf, the lessor of the plaintiff, comprised the land designated as aforesaid; and that the said lot No 16, in square No. 75, allotted to the lessor of the plaintiff by the said commissioners, in the said division of the said square, was also part of the land so designated; and offered parol evidence, by a competent witness, who was not present at the survey, that the lessor of the plaintiff was, in the month of October 1794, in possession of the land designated by the lines and letters E. s. g. which is now demanded, and designated on the said plot, by lot 16 in square 75, under the claim of title.
But the court refused to permit the said parol evidence to be given to the jury; the same having been objected to, on the ground of the witness not having been on the survey.
The plaintiff having established a good title in his lessor in October 1794; the defendant offered to read in evidence to the jury, for the purpose of showing that the title to the lot in question was out of the lessor of the plaintiff after the year 1794, a paper purporting to be a copy of certain proceedings under the bankrupt law of the United States, admitted to be duly authenticated; and a deed from the persons therein named as commissioners of bankruptcy to Edward S. Burd, and a deed from the said commissioners and Burd to John Miller, Jun. To the admission of which in evidence, the counsel for the plaintiff objected; and the court sustained the objection, as to the said two deeds.
And thereupon the defendant prayed the court to instruct, and the court did instruct the jury, that by the proceedings of bankruptcy, the said James Greenleaf, the lessor of the plaintiff, was divested of the legal title in and to the said lot No. 16 in the said square No. 75, in the declaration mentioned; and that the said legal estate was thereby vested in the said commissioners of bankruptcy; and rejected the said deeds as any evidence in said cause.
Whereupon the plaintiff, in addition to the evidence aforesaid, offered to read in evidence to the jury, the said deeds in the said proceedings mentioned from the said commissioners of bankruptcy to the said Edward S. Burd, and the said deed from the said commissioners and the said Edward S. Burd to the said John Miller; and also a copy of a deed, duly authenticated, from the said Miller to Samuel Eliot, Jun.; and a copy, duly authenticated, of a deed from the said S. Eliot, Jun. to James Greenleaf, the lessor of the plaintiff: which the court refused to admit to be read in evidence.
The plaintiff excepted to those several opinions of the court, and prosecuted this writ of error, to reverse the judgment of the circuit court in favour of the defendant.
The case was argued by Mr Coxe and Mr Jones, for the plaintiff in error; and by Mr Swann and Mr Key, for the defendant.
Mr Justice STORY delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse