Ringgold v. Hinson

ACTION of trespass. At June Term the defendant pleaded not guilty. Ordered, That the same Jury which is appointed by this Court to view the land now in question between James Ringgold and Anthony Purs, (see the preceding ease,) do view the land in question between the plaintiff and defendants. At October Term, 1666, the surveyor-general reports, that “ the order of Court by mutual consent, was not ful- “ filled, a July being found unnecessary, but was pro- “ ceeded, with the assistance of William Coursey, in laying “ out the bounds according to the intention of the first “ survey, as more fully appears by the cut and plot deli- “ vered to me.” Some differences arising concerning the surveyor-general’s report, and all parties not agreeing thereto, the board ordered, That this cause be again respited to the next Provincial Court.

And further ordered, That care be taken in the choosing twelve men of a Jury of the neighbourhood, who are hereby also “ ordered o go with “ and inform the surveyor-general or his deputy the na- “ tural bounds of each parcel of land mentioned in each “ patent, according to the former order granted, to be ful- “ filled in every respect with the lines mentioned in the “ said patents. The said plaintiff and defendant having “ liberty to choose twelve men a-piece, present them to the “ surveyor-general or his deputy, whereof he is to pick “ out of each an equal number for that appointed Jury, “ and to appoint his said deputy, or go with them himself, “ to the end that a true survey may be made and plots “ drawn fair, and a report given under the surveyor’s “ hand, and sent down to the next Provincial Court, to be “held the 11th December next, and that the