
    ALLEGHENY COUNTY,
    September Term, 1795.
    Lessee of James Hamilton v. Andrew M‘Culloch.
    THIS was an ejectment for 306 acres in Versailles township, Allegheny county.
    Woods, for the plaintiff,
    shewed a warrant to James Hamilton, dated 16th July, 1787, for 300 acres of land, called the Whiteoak-Level, adjoining lands of the heirs of M’Kee, deceased; a survey on this warrant made 11th October, 1787, of 306 acres and 133 perches, and the allowance; and a patent dated 11th March, 1788. He then shewed a deed from the sheriff of Westmoreland county, (which then included the land) dated 2d August, 1785, to James Hamilton, for 300 acres of land sold for 53l. on an execution against James Thomson, joining lands where James Thomson lives. This is the same land for which the patent was given on the warrant and survey, and is the land now claimed by the plaintiff.
    It was then proved, that this land, which was known by the name of the Whiteoak-Level, had been claimed by James Thomson, and sold, as stated, to Hamilton, on a judgment against Thomson, in Westmoreland county, in which the land then was. When Hamilton bought the land from the sheriff, he asked John M'Kee, (who lived hear the land, and from whom M'Culloch derives his title) what he thought of the land, whether it was good, and whether there was any dispute in it. M'Kee told him it was good, there was no dispute in it, it had always been known as Thomson’s ; and offered his service to Hamilton in renting or selling it. Afterwards a friend of Hamilton’s hearing that M'Kee intended to take a warrant for this land in his own name, got an application and certificate made out in the name of Hamilton, and sent them down to Carlisle, where Hamilton lived, advising him immediately to take out a warrant. It was further proved, that adjoining this land, and the land on which John M'Kee lived, one Goban, brother-in-law of M'Kee, had, in 1770, made a settlement, and lived on it twenty-one years. Goban never claimed any part of the Whiteoak-Level tract, round which there were old lines, though there was no improvement on it. John M'Kee his father, and brothers, claimed the other land round Goban’s farm, so that his claim was circumscribed to about sixty or seventy acres. This Goban's heirs sold to John M'Kee in 1786, for 25s. per acre. M'Kee went round Goban’s claim, and found the lines between it and the Whiteoak-Level tract. Goban’s improved land does not touch Hamilton’s lines. In 1788, M'Kee took out a warrant in the name of Hugh Goban, and on it surveyed the Whiteoak-Level tract, together with Gabon’s claim; and afterwards sold part of the land to M'Culloch.
    
    Young, for the defendant,
    shewed a warrant to Hugh 
      
      Goban, dated 22d February, 1788, for four hundred acres, including an improvement, joining lands of John M'Kee, James Thomson, and others, in Huntington township, Westmoreland county; a survey of three hundred and seventy-four acres, and twenty-four perches, made 19th March, 1788; a patent dated 8th June, 1788; a conveyance from Hugh Goban to John M'Kee, for 78l. dated 29th June, 1788; and a conveyance from John M'Kee to Andrew M'Culloch, of two hundred and twelve acres, dated 20th May, 1789.
    
      Young, contended, that M'Culloch, as a bona fide purchaser without notice ought to be maintained in the possession of this land.
   President.

There is no evidence, that the disputed land was ever within the claim of Goban: it was always in the claim of Thomson. Goban might confine his claim within as narrow bounds as he pleased. He did confine himself, on the side next the Whiteoak-Level tract. What claims he might have, or how he might urge or dispute them, on any other side, or how much he might have sold to others, we know not. It seems he sold to M'Kee 60 or 70 acres, and never claimed any part of the Whiteoak-Level tract. Hamilton bought the only claim then known to it. He had a right to take out a warrant for it. He took out the first warrant for it. His title is complete. Goban had no equitable title to it. And M'Kee’s legal title, being posterior to Hamilton's, is void. M'Culloch, therefore, purchased a void title, and whether bona fide or not, can derive no right under it.

Verdict for the defendant.  