Case Name: Wilson v. Bass, Administrator of Patton
Court: Supreme Court of Errors and Appeals of Tennessee
Jurisdiction: Tennessee
Decision Date: 1818-04
Citations: 3 Hayw. 110
Docket Number: 
Parties: Wilson v. Bass, Administrator of Patton.
Judges: 
Reporter: Tennessee Reports
Volume: 6
Pages: 599–601

Head Matter:
Wilson v. Bass, Administrator of Patton.
[Land Law. — Boundary.]

Opinion:
Pee Cueiam.
Collingsworth's grant of 640 acres called for a line from .the second corner, an ash, 427 poles long, crossing Little Harpeth at 200 poles. The mesne conveyance to Johnston called for Little Harpeth at 200 poles, in the same words the grant did, and also for 320 acres of land. After calling for Little Harpeth at 200 poles, it adds, cornered on a stake at 213v poles ; thence north, &c. Johnston's deed to Patton is in the same words. Patton's deed to Wilson begins on a red oak, in a little branch near the corner of said Patton's plantation, and on the south boundary line of said Crocket's survey; thence south, 176 poles, to a white oak, near the corner of James Watson's fence, thence south 65, west 49^ poles, to a hickory stump near the centre, between a hickory and dogwood, and white walnut and red oak sapling, as pointers ; thence south, 46 poles, to a small iron-wood standing nearly in the centre between two saplings, an iron and dogwood marked as pointers; thence east, 651.- poles, to a stake nearly in the centre and between a cluster of lynns, a large elm, and some other saplings marked as pointers, 13J poles to the east of Little Harpeth ; thence north, 252 poles, to Samuel Crocket's south boundary line ; thence west to the beginning, * containing by estimation 40 acres, 32 poles. After the death of Patton, Wilson declared in a warranty contained in a deed for these lands last mentioned, and for breach; said that Patton had no title, but that one Shute had, who has incumbered the land by disturbing him in the possession thereof, and hitherto hath and still doth prevent said Wilson from enjoying and occupying the same, &c. The administrator pleaded covenants performed. The jury found for the defendant, and judgment was given for him. The court charged the jury, that the land conveyed to Patton extended 13§ poles east of Harpeth River; upon which a bill of exceptions was taken, and an appeal in the nature of a writ of error. The distance from the ash, the second corner of the patent, along the second line to the river, is 213 poles instead of 200. The question is, whether Patton's land did extend 13 J poles east of the river.
The intent was to convey to Johnston one half the tract. 320 acres are called for; the one half of 640. And a line of 213-g-poles, being the half of 427 poles, the length of the second line, as called for in the patent. The description is in all the mesne conveyances, down to Patton inclusively. The parties by these deeds have agreed that the distance from the ash to the river is 200 poles. And shall they not be concluded by it? Whatever is agreed by the parties in pleading or conveyances, cannot be contradicted by either of them. The point of termination is not at the river, but at the point which is 18poles east of the river.
Judgment affirmed.
See the authorities collected in King's Digest, 1700 et seq.