Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1880-01-10

possessors claim, and of cancelling
all void DEGREES and judgments as
being clouds upon their title. The
suits do not all stand upon the same
basis, but may be reduced to five
categories, as follows:
First-This category includes lots
held under deeds made by G. ID.
Mclean as guardian of his daugh-
tiers Maria and Marcia. Defendants
in possession insist that these deeds
are good, Mclean being authorized
as guardian TO execute them by an
order of the County Court, but COM
plainants insist that the order OF
said court is void because there was
no pleading or process of any kind
served upon the minors, whose in
terests were thereby disposed of.
Defendants reply that no bill or
pleading was necessary and no pro-
cess need issue, the proceedings
being fully authorized by act of
State Legislature 1885, %. Com
plainants respond to this by denying
that the act adduced authorizes any
such eg pGrte proceeding, and con-
tend that if it does it is void, being
in violation of the bill of rights as
not being in due process of law.
Second-This category includes
lots sold by the Sheriff for taxes and
conveyed during the lifetime of
Bennett Searcy, and held in posses
sion by purchasers over fifty years.
Third-LOts sold tor taxes after
the death of Bennett Searcy and held
in possession under Sheriff's deed
over fifty years.
Fourth-LOts levied upon to sat
isfy judgments obtained against
administrator of Bennett Searcy's
estate, and sold under proceeding
of Scire fdcids against his heirs. In
this class complainants contend that
the writs of Scire fdciaS were served
upon G. d. Mclean and not upon
his children, as required by law,
and are therefore void as to the in
fants. (Most of the papers ON these
scire fdcidS proceedings, which &C.
CURED in court of pleas and quarter
sessions between 1919 and 1923, have
been either lost or mislaid or were
consumed in the great fire of 1879
Fifth-Lots levied upon by James
Adams in suit against Armstrong
after their sale to Bennett Searcy; On
the assumption that the preceding
sale was void They were then sold
at Sherif7s sale to G.. w. L. Mari,
who held the same under a deed
from John Coke, Sheriff. dated
Nov. 10, 1897. (Register's books ID
and H, page 1867 These are claimed
by vendees holding conveyances
from g. w. L. Mari.
In addition to such special pleas
as are made in answer to the allega-
tons of complainants, the defend
ants under all these categories claim
to rely upon adverse possession for
over fifty years, and that all pre-
sumptions arising from lapse of
time or loss of documents shall be
allowed in their favor.
They also claim that where fail
ure of the service of due process of
law is alleged by complainants, the
Onts prO6aDdi rests on said COM
plainants, In other words, they
claim that they are entitled to the
presumption that all processes were
conducted according to law unless
proof to the contrary can be pro-
duced. For this position they rely
upon the broad principle laid down
by Coke in the following words:
E.r dilttl9nitGte tenlpOris Onlllid pre-
sttDllt1ltIT rite Ell SOlenlnite1' eSSe dctG.
(After the lapse of long time, the
presumption is that all things were
lawfully and regularly transacted.
On the whole, though we sympa-
fhize with our neighbors upon the
annoyance to which these suits sub
ject them, we look upon it as an
advantage that a legal decision is
likely to be shortly given upon the
validity of these claims. The un-
certainty arising from the knowl-
edge that they overhang the titles
to so much property has acted as
bar to the Improvement of very
valuable lots, and we look forward
with the sanguine expectation that
the present possessOrs will not only
retain their property but be relieved
from the uncertainty which has
rendered it nearly worthless to
them. Possession is and ought to
be nine points in the law, for the
knowledge that evidence of valid
ity in the original title becomes
,..r,,,.- ~,os,,. $500 a,1I mona sIsG3 oF,I4