Alexandria gazette, commercial and political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1812-1817, 1815-07-24

s. 4,e stats. Or dispose of the SAME
iye'y - nurnoses az they may please,
e = sas at the caisent or default Of the Ger
vlsaoas ia are not prepared TO admit !;
pe5a's sSb;ak ourselves standing upon the
Vas Of natural justice, Upon the
preferential laws of every free govern
fduoaA nnea the spirit and the letter of
Iaea' ''ast;t,tion of the United States, and
the s t,s decisions of most respectable
ag ya;ss tribauals, IN resisting such a.
lau urine. The statutes OF 1898, 60. 2.
cDs'' q 1901. CHI. $. are not, therefore in
anu ;.dgemept, operativeso far asto dir
oaa no Episcopsi church ofthe property
's s..;red sreysous to the Revolution, By
ss,l or By donation. In respect to
gsll ,ssfsr ssatixe, there is this farther OBJ
=. ..an. that il passed after the District
Z rolani;a was taken under the exclu-
ga jurisdiction of Congress, and as to
-. =. ssmooratious and property with
=: ~ 4sat District, the right of Virginia to
1.s.lste no longer existed. And as to
.,s statate Of l7sS, CHI. 9. admitting It
!, sJ bsse the fullest operation, it merely
.soa,ls the statutes passed respecting the
.snrch since the Revolution and, of
. Il left 10 full force aitthe statutes
ssssy;ousiy enacted SO far as they were
IL inconsistent With ths present eonsti-
sn.;cn. Il left, therefore, the impor-
amt provisions Of The statutes of 1861,
1906. i727, aud l74s, so far as respect
A the title to the church lands, IN per-
fset yigor, with SO much of the common
law a. attaehed opoa these rights,
Let us now advert to the title set by
The plaintiffs in the present bill. Upon
,;r,rscting the deed which il made part
5 nfthe bill. aud bears date in I77e, the
land appears to have been conveyed to
the grantees as church wafdens of the
marsh Of Fairfax and to their successors
Is that olfice, forever. It ID also averred
Il he bill that the plaintiffs, together with
two Of the defendants (whe are church
vardens) are the vestry of the Protestant
Episcopal Church commonly called the
Episcopal church of Alexandra in the pa
fi,h Of FaissMy, aud that the purchase
was made ~ the sestry Of said parish
{ aud church. to whom the present yestry
ss the legal and regular Successors in
tie said vestry; and that The purchase
was made for the use and henettot, the
said church in the said parish. No sta
tuts Of Virginia has been cited which ere
stss cnurch waFdens corporation Tor the
purpose Of holding lands and at common
law their capacity was limited to per-
sonal estate. ]. B. C.. s34.--Bro. Corp.
n. S4.--l. Role Abr. Sos. 4. 10.-Can.
Dig tit. Eshse, F. SIZE. IL. Z. 27. 6.
lis. II. z. 3. $50. I'll. s. SOL. Burns
Ecciss. Law, 290.--tibs. els.
1t would seem, therefore, that the pre-
sent deed did not operate By way of
grant to convey fee to the ehurch-war-
dsnS and their successors for their sue
ressors, as such, could not take; nor to
the charch-wafdens in their natural capa-
city; Tor $ heirs" is not in The deed.
satthe covenant Of general x,ssrsaty IN /,
aeaeed ending TIE grantors and their
ae's forever, ard Warranting the land to
the caureh-wardens and their successors
is,sver may well operate by way of estop-
to confirm to the church and its piis
IVES the perpetual and beneficial estate in
the land.
vae difficulty presented on the face
% tae bill was, that the Protestant Epls-
eopal Church of Alexandria was not de
Iee'ty ayerred to be the same corporate or
incorporate body as the church and
parisn OF Fairfax, or the legal successors
@sretc, SO as to eHtitle them to the lands
aeeotrsyessy. But upon an accurate ex-
ANNA animation OF the bill. it appears that the
purchase was made by the vestry 6 of
as sald parish aud church, :. for the
- and benefit of the said church in the
sas PARISH" Unjust, therefore, be TAX
= g true that there was ne ether Ely;s-
sVpa eaarch in the parish; and that the
r0psET belonged to the church of A
.sAaadrla, which in this respect, repre-
su'su the whole parish. And there can
: % doubt that the Episcopal members
le parish of Fairfax have still, not
). s.''sSs,saadlns separation from the State
v, us'aia, the same rights and pri-
, ss as they originally possessed in
r,. .asa 10 that church, while it was the
ea ans church Of Fairfax.
;ae next consideration is whether the
ssss who are ysstrymen, have, as
$50 right to require the lands of the
iar !; 90 be SOLD "a the manner prayed
n. N tie bill. Upon the supposition
,SN 10 Statutes oaSsaa e;nca a. D..