The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-04-25
The Man0rial Title Case.
BY MoRsK's MA0NEric TELEGRAPH.


tho trial. to all appearance, is fast approaching its
end.
Tho prosecution have opened with rebutting testi-
mony and 1t Is expected that the defence will com.
mence Its summing up tomorrow.
The summing up on both sides will, In all probsb
ty OCCUPY from six to eight hours and this with the
charge Of the Judge will doubtless take till Thursday
evening, before which time the cause cannot bc
pected to 60 to the jury.
Tho witnesses introduced since last report Jacob
Barripger, Cornelius Van Bensohoten, John H. Coon
John s. Fulton, Harmon Livingston, the defendant
Harry Dunspaugh, Charles Essletyne aud Droman
Van Rensselaer,.
Jacob Barrinser testified that he had cut wood on
the disputed premises, to burn brick for defendant
Livingston.
Cornelius Van testified to tho location Of
sevcrsl round the premises also that he had
cut wood upon the premises.
John H. Coon testified to location Of promises
John 3. Fulton testified that he lived the pre-
mises In question and had cut wood them under
warrant from defendant.
A map of the premises in question had been COM
mitted to the Of judy rename for safe keeping
and found In Of my previous reports,
you will find that map Of the premises In ques-
tion, which committed to tho Of Judge
Tremaine for safe keeping lost and the defendant
the premises The prosec ution having attempted to
make handle OF this fact and having intimated that
defendant had secured destroyed the map, the de-
Endsnts testimony to the point taken, aud he
swore that he had made search among all his papers,
and had endesvored to find the map that he had not
been able to find it, aud that, according TO his best
recollection, the map had been committed sometime
since to the of Augustus Tremsine
Shortly after the defendant examined, Mr.. Van
Rensselaer,, who had been deputed to search among
Judge Tremaine's papers, came into court, bringing
with him the map, much to the qualification Of de-
fendants counsel, who introduced tho same In evil
dence Had the map been discovered the trial
would in all probability, have been much shortened
the defence had been obliged to give oral testimony
as to location ofpremises.
The witness Stall recalled last evening, and
testified . to the location Of several farms, sc.
The witness Tremaine, WAS recalled this morning,
and testified that he had made q survey some years
ago. of the premises In question for Harmon Lvings-
ton, and identified the map.
Broman Van Rensselaer,, was to whore he
found the map, 60, and testified that tho
found among the papers of Judge Tremane at his
sdence Hilsdale
The witness Essletyne that he had been agont
for Harmon Livingston, aud had collected rent Of the
tenants for him
The witness Dunspaugh sworc that he agent for
defendant from 1888 to 1872 and had also collected
rents from the tenants.
ArRrL 81, 1850.
The prosecution Is still on tho robuttng testimony
James Redheld Or. II. b. 0Callaghan, II. w. Robin
son. Henry Younghance, and Augustus Tremainc, have
been examined since last report.
Rodheld, OCallaghan and Robinson were examined,
as to searches made by them In the Offices Of the
County Clerk Secretary Of state and Surveyor Gene
raj. They had been able TO find in the Clerks Of
fee any record Of patent In any Of the Offices any
thing respecting the title, except couple Of Indian
deeds and some other few papers.
The prosecution introduced two Indian deeds grant
Ing lands to Livingston They have also introduced
patent dated lath November 1851 also patent dated
eth August, 1885. These patents were produced by
defence at request Of the prosecution Both patent,
were granted under James tho Second.
Prosecution have also read Coldsu's report, from
o'cailsghans Documentary History of the State
showing how q great many landlords had taken or a.
sumed lands not granted them by their patents
The prosecution also read from Van sohaick's Law.
Of New York, act annulling the grant to Godfrey
and others, Of lands situate on Msrquess river.
With this testimony tho defence closed, and the
prosecution commenced introducing its reJuttns
testimony.
They first presented certified copy OF commission
Of fGovernor Thomas DonneghAn with q viewlof show
ing that under u he had right 10 grant the patent
Mr.. southcriand, for defence, objected to tho ad-
mission Of sho evidence, on several grounds.
First, The prosecution had no right 10 INTRODUCES
evidence, unless the point upon which IL intro
duced Issue In the pisadngs; that II this point
In issue II was only colateraily, and defence
had not anticipated H. II to be inferred from
the pleadings that this right was questioned
Second, The power to grant patent had been rccog-
niscd by the oolonsi government, and by the State
government, aud the State bound by Its sdmis-
sions
Third The State had recognised grant,, and hsd
declared them to be good, II such grants de-
ciared by tho government granting them. Thcee
patents were granted by the English government; 1t
had recognised tbs valid because had purchased
hack Of the pstentees some six thousand Of the
land 80 granted.
The Court, however, SLOWED the commission to bo
introduced.
They have also read sections from smishs h~sory
Of the State, and other historical works. The pre-
else object they have in reading these works I. not
nov apparent. They probably will be referred TO In
the summing up
Mr.. Van Buren submitted the sections read A. mat
ters Of history, not a. evidence
The ~itnesscs, YounghAnce and TremaIne es-
amned as to location Of premises and tho survey Of
them was submitted TO tho inspection Of each
DR. oCailshsn was called by defence and s-ore that
he had read In historical works Of the Manors having
been represented In the colonial government aud had
the OF such representatives IN gov.rnment
reports.
spirited argument has just taken ptsos between
counsel 80 10 whether there any for sury 10
nnd upon and TO whether the should 10 TO II
not
The defence say Il h purely question Of Law. while
M Va n..x.
jury.
The defence take the matter mp In form for The ~cI.
zion Of the Court and move q nonsuit
The arguments thus made were called forth By the
question ofthe validity of the patents
Mr Van Buren contendea that the patents having
ben introduced the only way 10 disprovs them was
BY negative and legal decision and testimony, sod
That the patents we're shown 10 be worthless lie de.
'r,d the question of tho validity of the patents 10 be
brought before the jury for their decision The de-
fence argue for nonsut on the ground that there 10
no question o. fact to be submitted to the