Doe on Demise of the Trustees of the University of North-Carolina v. Hogg , 9 N.C. 370 ( 1823 )

Hall, Judge.

I can see no objection to the opinion of the Court in this case. It appeared in evidence, that the Defendant had been in possession of the lot in dispute more than seven years. It also appeared from the Plaintiff’s own shewing, that the possession was under a colour of title, namely, the will of Thomas Jennings. I say from their own shewing: because, when the Plaintiff introduces the petition in evidence, he makes the whole of it evidence against him as well as for him. It is very true, that from the tenor of the petition, it appears that the Defendant did not believe or think that he had title to the lot of land, but it is to be observed that this petition bore date in the year 1819, at which time the Defendant had been in possession of the lot since the death of Thomas Jennings, (a longer period of time than seven years,) under the will of Thomas Jennings — and that he had thereby acquired title to it.

I think an ignorance of his title ought not to prejudice him. Had he presented this petition to the Trustees before his possession had ripened into title, and when the title was really in the Trustees, that would have been aa acknowledgment of their title; and that he held under (them j in chat situation no length of time would, hay© acknowledgment given him title; but as there was no of this sort before his title became complete, one made after it will not affect the case.

I therefore think the nonsuit was properly entered.

Tayxou, Chief-Justice, and Henderson, Judge, con curred, and a new trial was refused.