Court Opinion

ID: 6145692
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-02-05 15:25:27.981248+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:54:51.289199
License: Public Domain

But the Court of Errors reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court, on the ground that it was the manifest intention of the parties that the townships should be but “ six miles square, and contain twenty-three thousand and forty acres, and no more.” The court held therefore, that the township should be re-surveyed, and a correction made of the boundaries, so as to reduce each, township to 6 milpa square, and to the contents specified in the deed.
It was also held, that the grantees would have a right of election to locate their grant in any part of the two townships as surveyed at the date of the deed, the only restriction being to locate in a square form.
Judgment unanimously reversed.
The Chancellor in delivering his opinion, observes that “the judges of the Supreme Court appear to have supposed the verb ‘ to beas having been inserted instead of the participle ‘ being,’ by the conveyancer, who copied the description from one in existence before the townships were surveyed.”
The Chancellor denies the right of that court to resort to *126such evidence to ascertain the meaning of words, which are clear and positive on the face of the deed.