Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1822-03-02
lrAR'r III. concluded in our neyt.l
Communicated for tAt F,ankjor, .f,c1.,

Communicated for tie F,ankjors fyr1s.,
Grsen as. Btdde.-A case depending in the
Supreme Court of the United States, and
which involves the constitutionality of the
laws of Kentucky, for the bonn fdc occu-
pants OF lands, who may be evictcd BY those
holding better titles.
We are requested to- state that Mr.. John
Green of Lincoln county, one of the heirs of
John Green deceased. upon seeing the report
of tie committee of the House of representa-
tive at the last session ofthe General Assem-
bly,, relative to this case, which was finally in
substance, adopted by the Senate, addressed
a letter TO Mr.. Pope, chairman of the commit
tee, in which he controverted very material
fact of the report, TO wit: That of the case
being fictitious me, amd requested to be
heard before the committee, aud To- he pen
intted 10 produce his witnesses then in Frank
fort, by whom he pledged himself to support
the statements fills letter. But AR. Pope
returned no answer, and the Objectionable
parts ofthr report were retained. As this
case has exhibited much public attention it is
but matter OF common justice TO those con-
cerned that the material facts should he gener-
ally known. We are informed they are as fol-
lows: John Green deceased late of Virginia,
claiming title TO ii considerable tract of land
in Bourbon and Fayette counties, the greater
part Of which was in the possession of adverse
claimants, commenced law suits 10 the federal
courts, in most of which his was found TO be
the better title. The unsuccessful occupants
of whom Biddie was one, then commenced
their suits for compensation for improvements
made on the land, Under the occupying claim
ant laws of Kentucky. Old Mr.. Green re-
sisted this claim, and commended that hy The
compact with Virginia, the laws Of that state
should furnish the only rules of deciding the
question and that the laws Of Kentucky, so
far as they affected his interests, were uncOn-
stitutiOnal and void. THIS being the first case
in which the point was made before the Fed
cral Court and that tribunal feeling doubts,
it was by tile court al lournedto the Supreme
Court for their advisement. The causes be-
tween Green and the other occupants, pre-
sent the same questions, and would no doubt
have been likewise adjourned to the Supreme
Court but that it would have answered no 9th
or purpose than TO mulct the parties in addi-
tiona costs, as it was perfectly obvious that
they must all share the same fate. This was
not feigned. bur a real existing matter oil con
trOversy in which the one party prosecuted a
claim which the other resisted, and in which
each, no doubt, expected that the other would
do all in his power to insure success. While
this cause was pending in the Supreme Court,
old Mr.. Green died, leaving bis land aud his
law suits as an inheritance to his heirs.
The circumstances which probably being
misunderstood, gave rise to the statement
that the cause was a fictitious ono, are these.
after this cause had been taken to the su-
preme court and after the death of John
Green, one Of his heirs, widow lady, being IN
need ola sum Of money,appicd to the person
who acted as agent for John Green's heirs, for
his consent that she should sell out to some
one Of the occupants q small part Of the land.
The agent knowing her portion would a.
mount to much more tran she wished to sell.
gave his consent, and she contracted with
Fiddle TO sell him the land he occupied. No
deed has becr made and there are several Of