[ocr errors]




1. Definition ......... page 1 | 4. Custom- Prescription .... 6 2. The Queen ............ 4 5. Foreign Law .......... 3. Parties affected by ...... 5 6. When it attaches ........ 9

1. LIMITATION is a species of prescription, and is of two kinds; the first, where it takes away the remedy and the right, as is the case with respect to interests in

the remedy only.

At the common law the only limitation as to the time of making claims was, that it should be made within a year and a day before the dying seised ; (a) and the Statutes of Limitation do not affect titles of honour, such as peerages or baronetcies ; upon the principle that if the proofs made by the petitioner of his pedigree are clear, the contrary thereof, or an adverse possession thereto, ought not to be any bar; for there is not any person in esse interested under such

(u) Litt. s. 427.


possession ; (6) nor estates tail, granted by the crown in recompense of services; (c) a rent charge ; (d) or other rents created by act of parliament, (e) because the beginning thereof being given thereby, it forms the title, and is termed by Yelverton and Hutton Js. “a rent coming out of the womb of parliament ;" for the act preserves seisin to the grantee, as he cannot have escheats or other profits; and therefore laches of time, though for a hundred years, will not prejudice his right. Neither do they extend to quit rents, (f) or to personal liens; (g) suits in the Admiralty Court for a mere maritime (h) claim, or to a right arising super altum mare; (i) to charities ; (k) suits in the Ecclesiastical Court de rationabili parte bonorum ; (1) for a pension, (m) as it must have been time out of mind; as to wills and testaments ;(n) or intestacies ; (c) for laying violent hands on a clerk in orders, (p) as this is a prosecution of a

(6) Lords' Journals, vol. xxxi. 530; Barony of Willoughby of Parham, printed cases.

(c) 34 & 35 Hen. 8, c. 20 ; Perkins v. Sewell, 1 W. Bla. 654 ; Mitford v. Elliott, 1 J. B. Moore, 434.

(d) Cupit v. Jackson, M.Clel. 495 ; and see Mo. 190. (e) Fawkeners v. Bellingham, Cro. Car. 80. (f) 3 Lev. 21; Eldridge v. Knott, I Cowp. 214. (g) 2 Saund. 67 a, n.(s); Spears v. Hartley, 3 Esp. 81. (h) Ewer v.Jones, 2 Ld. Raym. 934, 6 Mod. 25; Anon. 11 Mod. 6. (i) Anon. I Ventr. 308. (k) Att. Gen. v. Mayor of Coventry, 2 Vern. 399. (1) Force v. Brown, March, 129, 152. (m) Anon. 1 Ventr. 265. (n) Glanville, lib. 7, c. 6, 7. (0) Selden's Works, vol. iii. 1672, 1676. (p) Hide v. Partridge, 2 Salk. 227.

« ForrigeFortsett »