Legal Papers of John Adams, volume 1

Adams’ Minutes of the Referees’ Hearing in Wilkins’ Suit<a xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" href="#LJA01d085n1" class="note" id="LJA01d085n1a">1</a>: Middleton, July 1772 JA

1772-07

Adams’ Minutes of the Referees’ Hearing in Wilkins’ Suit: Middleton, July 1772 Adams, John
Adams' Minutes of the Referees' Hearing in Wilkins' Suit1
Middleton, July 1772
Wilkins. vs. Fuller

Deed. Wm. Fuller to Jona. Wilkins.

Archelaus Fuller. Known the Place there 30 years. Wilkins mowed the Land, 1 or 2 Years. Orchard, runs down to the Edge of the Brook. 277The Water used to help the Land. But Fullers Dam and Mill there, immediately flowed this Land of Wilkins's and flowd over an high Way that we used to pass to Meeting. It flowd up into Wilkins's an Acre and ½ and round several Apple Trees—8 or 10. The Ice would tear the Turffs off, and threw it in Heaps and another sort of Grass and flaggs2 came in the room of it. A fine Apple tree, was killd by it, as I suppose. 3 Barrells of Cyder a Year. They cutt a 2d Crop, of good Hay before the flowage. There is a Load of Hay odds,3 worth 9 or 10 Pounds on an Average. The ground when the Water is drawn off is black as a Hat, and a bad Smell the latter End of May. No Mill there since my Remembrance.

Andrew Fuller. 8 or 9 Years since Fuller erected his Mill. Blue Grass before and the want of fresh Grass since. Apple trees, as good bearing Trees as ever known in an orchard. A Number of Trees gone to decay. A Sound Tree, that died. A large Body of Ice froze round it, and as the Water rose and fell the Ice rubbed the Bark off in several Places. The trees are all upon the decay, and now of little Value. Grass not half so good, as it was. Wilkins got about 2 Load, a Year. I suppose the Trees have been planted 40 Years. I remember before any of them Trees bore of apples.

Jacob Smith. Very good Grass better than 2 Load at 1st and 2d Crop. It has been flowd every Season, better than an Acre. The year before last and every Year before, I mowd it. The 1st Year after it was flowd there was little or no Hay, and very little at any Year since, not a Load. Imagine the Water kill'd the Trees. Bore 2 Barrells a Year upon an Average. A Load we put round the Edges.

Robert Pierce. The Ice tore up the Ground, about the Roots and the Tree died soon. The large Tree had the bark torn off, quite thro.

2 Witnesses about Cyder, Apples, Trees &c.

Porter. Trespass could not be maintained because the Plaintiff not now owner of the Land. Credibility of Witnesses &c.

Mr. Andrews. 69 years ago I helpd draw some Timber to that Mill dam. The Mill sawd Boards for our Meeting House and that is all I know. No Mill there these 50 or 60 years.

Mr. Chandler. It does not look as if any Thing grew on it.

Saml. Cheever.

Rob. Indian. Damages Land, to flow and not keep up the Pond all Winter.

278

Bart. Buxton. ½ an Acre flowd now as dam up. And the flowing the ½ Acre does more hurt than flowing the whole would all Winter.

Thos. Hart. About an Acre flowd.

Andrew Fuller. The freshit has removd a stick and Gravel and made a stop.

Porter. Persons interested not to be credited, and the most credible Witnesses to be believd.

Trees tarr'd. Denyd it.

Law regards not Trifles.

Serjeant. Uncertainty of the Witnesses about the Number of Years. Not the stench to Mr. Smith nor the damage to the High Way.

1st. as to damnifying the Grass. It may be attributed to the upper Mill. Jam4 Tree, overated.

Col. Fuller set it at 2 dollars a Year.

1.

In JA's hand. Adams Papers, Microfilms, Reel No. 185.

2.

Presumably the marsh plant known as cattail.

3.

“Oddments” or “more or less” are equally valid interpretations.

4.

MS is fairly clear, but the meaning remains obscure.

Wetmore’s Minutes of the Smith Trial<a xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" href="#LJA01d086n1" class="note" id="LJA01d086n1a">1</a>: Essex Superior Court, Ipswich, June 1771 Wetmore, William

1771-06

Wetmore’s Minutes of the Smith Trial: Essex Superior Court, Ipswich, June 1771 Wetmore, William
Wetmore's Minutes of the Smith Trial1
Essex Superior Court, Ipswich, June 1771

June 1771

Smith and Wilkins v. Fuller. Bacon Trespass 212. Continuando in trespass may be waved and evidence given of any trespass before the action.2

See 2 Barnardiston 120. Trespass for disturbance in freehold; title allow'd to be given in evidence by defendant and Comyns said that any possession longer than 7 or 8 years was evidence of it.3

This action is trespass for erecting a dam on plaintiffs land and flowing it from 1765. Evidence was offered of erecting dam in 1762, 279but objected to it as excluded by limitation Act. Answered that it's repealed. Judge Trowbridge seem'd to think it not repeal'd by the temporary law,4 and that on declaration for trespass done between 2 days certain, evidence was not admissible without5 those days.

1.

Wetmore Notes, No. 2, Adams Papers, Microfilms, Reel No. 184. The minutes seem to refer only to Smith's case. The reporter's title, “Smith and Wilkins v. Fuller,” suggests, however, that he deemed the cases to be related. The relationship is borne out by the fact that the Wetmore minutes of Wilkins' case (Doc. I) appear in the MS several pages after these minutes.

2.

5 Bacon, Abridgment 212: “If the Trespass charged in this Action is laid with a Continuando for the whole Time, from a Day on which the first Trespass is charged in the Declaration until a subsequent Day therein mentioned, it is not necessary for the Plaintiff to prove a Continuance of the Trespass for this whole Time: But he must prove a Trespass within it; unless he chooses to waive the Continuando entirely, in which Case he may give Evidence of any one Trespass committed before the Action was brought.”

3.

Baynes v. Reeves, 2 Barn. 120, 94 Eng. Rep. 394 (Lent Assizes 1732), tried before Baron Comyns.

4.

The Act of 7 July 1740 had set limitation periods for various personal actions; that for “trespass upon lands” was five years. 2 A&R 1020. A clarifying Act of 1 Feb. 1749 established a four-year limitation period for “actions of account, or upon the case, grounded on any lending or contract.” 3 A&R 444, 445. In a series of “temporary” Acts, subsequent legislatures successively extended the deadline for existing causes of action. Act of 5 June 1752, 3 A&R 609; Act of 19 April 1754 3 A&R 727; Act of 31 Oct. 1755, 3 A&R 886; Act of 31 Aug. 1757, 4 A&R 26, 27; Act of 16 Jan. 1760, 4 A&R 280. And in 1767, the limiting date was made 1 July 1770. Act of 20 March 1767, 4 A&R 920. But the legislature did not consider the problem again until the fall of 1770, at which time it passed an Act repealing every previous limitation statute and providing that “all actions of trespass quare clausum fregit; all actions of trespass [de bonis asportatis] ...; all actions of account and upon the case, other than such accounts as concern the trade of merchandize” brought after 1 Dec. 1770 should be commenced as follows: “the said actions upon the case (other than for slander), and the said actions of account, and the said actions of trespass [d.b.a.] ... and trespass [q.c.f.], within six years from [1 Dec. 1770], or within six years next after the cause of such actions or suits, and not after.” Act of 20 Nov. 1770, 5 A&R 109–110.

The “temporary law” referred to by Trowbridge in the minute was apparently the 1770 Act. According to Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson's letter transmitting the legislation of the session just concluded to England for approval, the 1770 Act was “not a Temporary Law but placed among them [i.e. in the compilation of all laws passed at the session] through inattention which must be corrected.” Hutchinson to Lords of Trade, 21 Dec. 1770, in 5 A&R 143 note. The plaintiff seems to have argued that under the 1770 Act matters arising at any time prior to 1 Dec. 1770 were not barred until 1 Dec. 1776. Trowbridge's point was probably that the 1770 Act did not repeal the 1740 Act as to causes of action on which suit had been brought before 1 Dec. 1770. Since the 1740 limitations on trespass q.c.f. had not been among those extended by later legislation, the 1762 evidence was clearly barred when this action was brought in 1770. For JA's role in the passage of the 1770 Act, see p. lxxxvii, note 204, above.

5.

That is, “before or after.” The comma following “certain” has been supplied.