The daily gazette., 1879-12-05
FIFTH EDITION.
OUR COUNTY COURTS.

TnE EJECrMENT sUIT--ALL TALK AND
NO SIDE IssUEs-IHE ARGUMENT ny
Mr.. CUMMINs.
Specially repotted fnr the Gszeite.
Nav CASTLE, December 5.-When
Court was CALI d this morning the Chief
Justice discharged ali jurymen excep:
those empanDtlled IN the ejectment suit
until next Monday morniDs, at ten
o'clock.
MIR Cummins supplemented his re-
marks made 10 the Court, last evening,
with an additional review ofutIicr points
nf law bearing upon the case. He then
turned to the jury aud addressed them
for three hours. lie described the prop
erty and the lines Of the land claimed
by the plainiiH, in commencing, aud
denied the plaintiffs claim that The west
boundary of the Leonard land was the
east line OF the dock marked on the
map the plaintiffs further claim that
he present dock was the old dock laid
out by Thomas West on this the counsl
differ. The defence J. al not only shown
a good paper title for the land, but also
could show possession for much more
thau 70 yeas. The fact that the Land
was occupied by the grandfather Of John
A. Harris, docs not prevent his heirs
from. proiiting by the occupancy even #
II was adverse possession. The defend
ants he said are not here to defend their
lit q TO the land, because il is not In dis
pite, but the plant rs are required TO
show that they have apcriectly cl ar and
legal title In order TO get verdict in
their favor.
This they cannot get with their claim
so obscure and ill-deiinded. The suit
In this case was institute ed Nov. Is, 1878,
by the Delaware Western Railroad Com
pany who came into possession of the
land by n deed dated June 20, 1878,
which conveys to the ID. W. X. X. Co.
all the right, title aud interest Ia all the
land conveyed TO the heirs of Samuel
Bush. The deed recites the land by the
description in John Moody's deed, and
the line Of the land thus conve; ed is the
same as that run by DANIEL Farra In
1874. In making this verdict the Jury
are TO act as did the & feeholders who
went on the land with a surveyor by or
der OF the Court of Chancery and derter-
mined Just where all this property late OF
Sam1 Bush was.
|
with the one Daniel Farra ran before
and showed that the fence indispute was
exactly right. The Messrs. Bush mus,
| certainly have been satisfied that he line
was correct, or they would have acted
differently, and no one can doubt tnat
the proceedings of he Court of Chan
| cery did not give 10 the heirs of Samuel
| Bnsh all they were entitled to- .ssS..
| Mr.. Cumnins, turning his remarks
TO the testimony of VIM. Bush alluded
to that gentlemen's statement regatding
running ihe,liDe by Farra In 1874 said h..
hal the lire run tn satisfy himsr II
whether he would be justified in cutting
the Harris line fence down. The result
plainly showed that he had no right 70
cut IL down, and Mr.. Fnsh i course shows
| that Samuel Hush's land never extended
ives: cf Tho line of the fence. Mr. Cum
| min went on 10 speak OF the course OF
Mr.. Bush VIXEN he instructed Jane,
Murphy TO pay the rent for his coal yard
To Harris, and not TO Mr.. Leonard's agent
as before, and finally closed at tins poi nj
| ny ealing attention to the fact that NJ r,
Bush did not establish a single line
necessary t. he accomplished to recover
| this property.
The indication Of the boundary shown
by tie testimony of Charles aud Enoch
| Moore IN reference to tho dock laid out
| ny Thomas West was reviewed NJ great
length. and the conclusion drawn that
he east side of the dock was where the
fence now IN, aud that the present dock
Is AN entirely new and different one.
Mr.. Cummins still has the floor a. o.
| clocx.