The Lessee of Biddle v. Shippen

APRIL TERM, 1773. The Lessee of Biddle v. Shippen. Evidence. — Li/mitation. A map of the town, of Germantown, made about thirty years back, ruled not to be good evidence. The stat. 21 Jac. I., c. 16, ruled to extend to Pennsylvania. The plaintiff, among other evidence, offered a map, made by one Zimmerman, about thirty years ago. One John Knorr, Zimmerman’s nephew, proved that said map was the work of his uncle, at the request of the people of Germantown ; that his uncle dying, before he was paid for it, it remained in the family ; that it contains the lines of the Germantown lots, and the adjacent out-lands ; that, upon any difficulty, they apply to him, and this map generally determines any dispute they may have about their lines. Mr. Ghew opposed this map, at first, but afterwards agreed that the lands in controversy were as laid down in it, and admitted it with a salvo of its being no precedent. Upon the plaintiff’s offering it to the jury to take cut with them, Mr. Ghew opposed it, and some difference arising, Tins Court declared it was not proper evidence, that they should not have allowed its being offered to the jury, nor would they suffer them to take it out with them, See Griffith v. Tunckhouser, 1 Peters’ C. C. 418; Jones v. Bache, 3 W. C. C. 199. [MAJORITY] But the Court also declared, that the statute of 21 Jac. I., c. 16, of twenty years’ possession, extended here; and that it had never been doubted, In Morris v. Vanderen, post, p. 67, C. J. McKean said, that the statute 21 Jac. I., c. 16, was not in force in Pennsylvania. Its principal provisions are contained in the act of 27th March 1713. 1 Sm. Laws 76.