The New Hampshire Reports Volume 41 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1861 edition. Excerpt: ... a commissioner, who reported that the plaintiff, at the date of the alleged trespass, was owner of the tract of land described in his writ, being the whole of lot No. 52 in the second division of eighty acre lots in Warner, in this county, excepting twenty acres from off the east end of the same, which had been conveyed by the plaintifi"s grantors to one P. Osgood, whose title the defendants, or one of them, had; and thatthe defendants, at the times specified in the writ, going beyond the limits of the twenty acres, broke and entered the plaintiff's close, the same being that portion of said eighty acre lot N o. 52, remaining after the conveyance of twenty acres to P. Osgood, and therein committed the trespasses complained of in'the plaintifi"s writ. The defendants, electing to try the case by the jur, filed a statement in writing, alleging, substantially, that they expected to show that they did not, at the times specified, break and enter the plaintifi"s close, the same being that portion of the eighty acre lot mentioned in said report remaining after the conveyance of the twenty acres mentioned in said report to P. Osgood, and therein commit the trespasses charged in the plaintifi"s writ, or any portion of the same, as found by the commissioner. ' On the trial before the jury, the plaintiff proved that the alleged trespasses were committed upon that part of lot No. 52, beyond the limits of twenty acres from 0fi' the east end of the lot, if those twenty acres were separated from the rest of the land by a line parallel to the undisputed east line of the lot, at such distance therefrom as to include precisely twenty acres. The defendants proposed to show that they owned the twenty acres, and that there was...