Sulphen v. Norris

Citations

• 44 Tex. 204

Syllabus

<p>1. Presumption of grant.—In cases of long-continued possession of land, where title is to be shown from, the government, the rule is that juries maybe instructed that they may presume a grant to have issued, not that they must so presume; nor will the presumption be entertained in behalf of a plaintiff who, in making out his case, shows that in fact no grant ever issued, or where he fairly rebuts such presumption.</p> <p>2. Same.—Cases may be found where juries have gone to the length of presuming a grant, in the face of the almost-admitted fact that none in fact existed. Such cases are referable to incorporeal hereditaments and not to the thing or fee.</p> <p>3. Same.—A presumption cannot, for its support, rest upon another presumption. The policy and law of Spain forbidding grants of land to foreigners, where it was sought to establish a grant anterior to 1824 in favor of a citizen of Maryland, it was error to refuse to ’ instruct the jury “that it devolved upon the plaintiff to show that the alleged grantee was a competent person to receive and hold such grant, and such fact must be established by proof, either positive or circumstantial, and not a mere presumption.”</p> <p>4. Same.—Where a party asserts the existence of a grant from long possession the possession should extend to definite and distinct boundaries.</p> <p>5. Limitation.—While a grant to the fee may not be presumed against the State, yet upon the location of a valid certificate upon the land by another, the possession continued for ten years from such location, would confer title to 640 acres, including the improvements so held.</p>