The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-11-15


common to them both
touch not thofe cafes, in which Id. Fairfax Rood
in any other relation, than merely Lord OF rhe fee.
touch ti,ofe, in which he had become private
proprietor. The General AHembly Of Virginia, anx-
ious TO aboh xaai and pts9s,Aai rents, due to the
government of Virginia and TO Lord Fairfax as loon
his rights had fallen into the hands of aliens, ref
peaed. IS beyond their reach, that perpetual revenue
which may have been, ina multitude of niianees, re-
erved by one individual from another, on grants OF
Land held by pniesfe gzraeJ9ip.
Anxious TO free people from thoie neo-dtru5Ls
Though degrading renrs which 70 ttrongiy partook Of
feudal nature. and which were due to the Lord Of
the Fee, they re!peed thoie rents which due to
the private ovVneys of the foil which Of conde
rablc amount which bore fome proportion to the
tual value profits of the lands and which (the
grantee having paid price for the land,
abioute aeGui6tion thereby formed the only compen
iaton receivable by the proprietor, Tor the poileon
and enjoyment his land.
a,deraand that this rent is to be recovered
on the principle that it is ground rent but call
on this to fhow any initance of gyoauI rent
which the leiior of the prenuies had not acquired
private rightto the foil Lord Fairfax was fully fen
Gbe Of the diitiuaion which exeed between his pro-
priea,y rights & his private rights the foil 1t
his uniform practice to make conveyance of lands
in fee in the uiua form fone friend, and take back
reconveyance thereof, when he meant TO acquire the
fee Eazpe property in them. The cafe before
preiSy finds that this WAS done in relation to the .
manors, and to the lot No. Is, in the of VIM
cheer In relation to the azaaors. this might (bus
tor the uniform practice aforefaid) have probably
been difpenfed with for the leafes granted to the
thereof convey not the abio!ute property of
the ion and carry the face Of then alnet every
line, trong badges of private ownerfhp the part
OF the ciior. No read thoie leafes and he
htate tor moment to believe that l.. Fairfaxs inten-
on was to convert the foil of thofe manors into eyi-
S1te property yet that not Iuhcent in the OPT
Mon o. the proprietor: thoie lands alto fbeet-
ed by him 60 the uniform proces of conveyance ana
,re-conveyance. But only thole conveyances bar
thoie an relation to lot No. 49, in the addition to the
town OF Wincheiter, thew Grongly L. Fairfaxs prac-
tice and ienie this fubea. If this court ihou!d
now adjudge the lot in queaion the a.cruing
thereon to be the prioat- property of the appellant
they will differ from L. Fairfax hnel, who thought
conveyance and re-conveyance neceH.ry, .cttse7sr
lie w,ihed to acquire private property.
Were 1t permitted to go out Of this record, I
would refer 10 the 9Th finding the cafe of Hunter
:" Fairfax, Formerly argued before ribs court where
IN Mr. Fairfax and the other party agreed, 4" That
Lord T. died ieed in fee offndy tracs cf land in the
county OF Frederick and other counties nthe Northern
Neck, containing altogether 100000 acres which had
been granted and e7nVe,ed by him to D. Martin in fee
upon the fame terms other lands were convened
and granted by him in fee aforelaid, which lands
were loon thereafter re-conyeyed by the fad Martin
unto him in fee" .
This word altogether taken in comedian m, u,;,h
the large number of acres mentioned ftrongly imports
that Lord Fairfax had the fee fmple property in no
id"d' IN the No. Neck, which had not undergone
mat proceis-But, however, that may be, as the ap-
peant does not lay claim to eli the lands and the
rents due thereon, exiting in the N Neck, bur only
TO iueh as had become the private property of l. F.
or ms ancefors, and has not flown in Dir cafe anv
lOfb rrefa hyxz thasA
could be or was acquired by L. r. than fuch convey
ance or re-conveyance, | am perfectly warranted in
ayng upon the cafe before u.s. that no ot5e, proces
can be known to this iabeet. how MANY otber,
ioever may exit Of any fuch in fa4 do exill or re
within the private knowledge of this court. We are
try this caufe upon the f<7s agreed between the
parties and not upon li7s which may be aedoed ar
may in faA exit, but do not exit upon this record
preiume ALTO that the appellant is bound by the al
s.!eas' express or implied of thoe under whom, he
claims and aito prctun,e that I. F. ha, ftronclv
admitted that the private property of the 10. in the
deed mentioned did not exiit in bin, by having omit
ted to extend to that LOT the proces he deemed il ne
eeiary to reor to, for acquiring the private proper
ty OF the lot No. 18 before mentioned Are NOT the
admifions of L. F. the admions of the prefer
Pelant And does not the 0d,vion now in aueflion
par HIM from ietting up the prefent claim! Does
th's court lit bere to vacate the admiion of parties
ana TO give them more than they can ak or DO con-
eeive themfeives entitled to- Iprcfume not.
Being clearly of opinion, upon the cafe Befoy. us.
that the private property of the foil was not, ner could
be acqnredby l.. Fairfax, except by conveyance aud
re.eonveyance, can take notice of any aicgeI ae
q1lh0" by furry, even that furvey for /. rs.
0EoH NE All notice offuch furveys that can now
tae's that in relation to the fuveys of the lots in
Wmcheitef, Lord F. has admitted tla il di.. not veA
the private property Of the foil i'll him he has admit
ted this, by making and taking conveyance and re-
conveyance OF the lot No. 10 in faid town. in order
TO ven IN him fuch properly therein He has admin
ted that the iurveys of the manors though confeedy
made Tor his 07oner, were adequate to fuch pur
pole by uilng finn la process in relston to them
Can We therefore fay, upon this record, that the mi
Vafe right OF foil was acqurable in any nftance by
mere furry! The aa OF compromife ITO be here.
alter more particularly noticed fates indeed, bveo-
e.fifaNy, that this mghtbe done. will only add a,
preient, that whenever cafe fha occur which will
tate faasto juify that inference, that aa ina re.
ceIre IRON me correspondent contraction but the
general and Hypothetical words of ain act grounded
perhaps on the Representation Of an ntereed party
cahnot makeflstto have antecedently exified which
on fair contribution by the judiciary, fha be found
to have had no fueh exiftence
But whatever may &c the cafe of furvey confeed.
=, '.de f'Ar l. E's ne. The ftrvst, of ,b L. =;
ADDITION to the town of Winchester was pot &c H.,
IL was for the ufe of bnrebric,, who ,cr.
.op pay high rate Of competition upon the gran, =,
inc ioii. L Fairfax indeed acquired rich, or coI
~ me los No. bnt that not by yr,ue Of the f,~
L flrh h. -. f