, 1866-11-27
OWNERSHIP WITHOUT TITLE.
An Interesting Land Suit-Can a Man
Devise, Not being Legal 0wneri
-TectnIcalities.

The case Of Dates IS. Brown, upon the decision
In which rested three other Gases, by the aamc
pEatntlz, the whole nnmbeE involving the utle 10
eighty acres Of ground In the North Division, 4
portion Of the real estate Of the la:a Alexander
mend, Ii the circntt Court Of the United states.
Ihe deeition involves several questions of law
Thch have en ssldsm sss been .dudis,ta
stood. 10 &c % case d declded e To- The mud ID.
yantsse of eiheT party 4 would be eas1ied e the
was delivered by the Court In the following
wordss
Brown would be dltposed Of th,s morning
have not particularly examined the case. since the
argument ~ osher ens;gements hare not pr.
te tho intention Of the parties 70 take th: case to
re Supreme conrt 3 q the United States, shcre.
b pbaps not do
clns1ons q which lave arrived IN The case;
Ssss EsFsss;se ey Paa ss5 ss
land. md the title vested IN Tic State Of ILL
Lois. After having made this purchase OF the
on b. 9Th dsy oi October. 1851: having, psior 10
his dcalh, nude h1s will, which is very brief
sS s1a ssS m T. a.aysI s9, @ Xns
,e o ked sna eoees soeesr aeS es
devise 10 my raid wife. Eleanor Il. Woico,t. .od
TO ny said danghtes, Ma15 Ann Woicot = be
e q
Mrs and stsisns ioTeSer @ Al lii de.;a he 1T:
bis vile and this taushlcf, him surviving. b sing
hrs only heirs, OF, By the terms Of the Will, his
! Gn1y 1evt6cea.
Ihe. que: :.ion has been made as to tho true can
et,uelton Of ILLS WILL Whether tic estatc or lot
! which he had purchased Of the State, and for
which he had paid, tue title 81 which va. not yet
complete, passed, b. thus III. 70 hls wife and to
| bold estate whatsoever. itnink Il did. 1t f. true
that the patent had not Fet issued from the stale,
1eaped or ha u eona Ma lad pa
the purchase money and he bad right to cali
npon The state for r. ssa'1g of the title, ltw.s
having Ibis absolute and pttteet eqnit,ble tit'e
ah1 ,Iak ,n.s DC ps va. of bis, bis ,asstaa asats
devite this property. 10 BE- sure be might have
u.cl more eonprehens:se terms; he m1:ht haze
form and na,ure, hnt ho chose to rse the tenn "'a
my freehold estate" The main object, Of course
In all Of this sial Il, 10 ascessa!n !ae mean
dune cuneirten1ly viii the snl+s. Of law. lie hat
vile and child, aud tie question is, taxing III
Ss ssaT s d At III ise
E.,lcr, wheILcr b, did mol intend 70 dosis
s &s s9esay ii hs 81
Then, 1t his death, this equitable tile to tht
Els Vie mud to his daughter, The UNDIVIDED hi
being vested In each. In January, 1sa2, tie daugt
ter died. a MINOR, and VI cour.e lntestate, b.tnc
at the Tine. orjy seven years of aco Sue Lett be
mother Ter surviving, sae, l,cing vested Wit
onc.haIf Of The estate that hhlf descended 10 III
; n.o,lcr. Thcu he Whole estate VI. vested in ID
muthrr. "
Sew h s s
70 he des1ssu n, " tae o1stn ates"a1af o1 M ae
i'ts % Claimed en- the part Of the plaintiff that t1
estate. sonccdng mat tne ilte peseea ny me VI
tNai IN ~ tns tse esh h ot ,bs al
10 hs m9thss st e %nshei m pasSsd St, 70 t y
anee o SEoSss " eha ey iha o!ae. '' II
+ r!aintlh here, being The child q Ae mnthet; Il
pea nas ne 9t hs ne 1 nc ana ins, m Fl
j. bistu OF a brother of the child thas one-nall
ess s;. 1efGd II tns oso'as' upon lug ooe'n'
Ia We Know that this doctrine Is firmly 1mplnnt
IN Tie common aT TIE most 1s1sl "a flns3'aa lIs. q
cI,,S y s,ftcr = thn deatf Of lis fa,her-