“On the 23d of September 1731, an agreement was made between the younger and elder branches of the Penn family; by which the right of government, and soil of the province of Pennsylvania, was confirmed to the younger branch, and' the private rights of the elder branch were confirmed to them. The plaintiff' claims under the elder branch, and lie founds his title on the warrant to William Penn, the second; for 200 acres of Liberty land; to which he was entitled in virtue of his character as first purchaser.

“A rule was obtained at the October term, in 1803, to set aside the nonsuit entered in this cause; and the question now came on to be argued . . . in an ejectment, the plaintiff must show, and it is enough for his purpose, if he does show a right of entry; or, in other words, a right of possession. If he prove twenty years’ possession, or the seisin of his ancestor, and a descent cast, it is in general sufficient, prima facie, unless the defendant show a better right.

“Rule for a new trial; the jury having found, contrary to the charge of the Court, which laid down, as the rule for estimating the damages, the loss which the plaintiff had sustained by the misconduct of the defendant, in violating his orders. The jury have given only the principal sum due, without interest; have allowed the defendant his commissions, though he claimed none; and have rated the exchange at par, when it was higher. Besides which, they have said, that the plaintiff shall not have costs.”

“Action of indebitatus assumpsit, for money had and received to use of bankrupts, and goods sold and delivered by them. Plea, non assumpsit, and notice to offset. The case was—Anthony & Pleasants, having shipped a cargo of tobacco and flour to John Waring, in Bristol, and intending to ship more; drew bills, as they were permitted to do, on Waring, for two-thirds the cost of those cargoes; which they got the defendants in Philadelphia, to endorse and negotiate for them on the usual commission.

“This was an action to recover damages for the invasion of the plaintiff’s patent right to a machine for rounding iron. It appeared in evidence, that the defendant, Kanowrs, was a farmer, and had on his farm, a common tilt or hammer and anvil, worked by water. The plaintiff, a German, and poor; informed Kanowrs, that he had invented a machine for rounding iron; but, from want of funds, had not been able to bring his theory to practice.

“This cause came on to be retried at this term. The evidence given at the last term, was again produced, and in addition thereto, a complete record of the proceedings in the Vice Admiralty Court at Halifax, was produced, and read. In it is stated at length, the following papers. A passport from the Spanish Consul, at Charleston, to the plaintiff, 17th February 1799, to go to Laguira, to attend to his concerns there.

“The defendant was indicted for perjury committed before the commissioners of bankrupts, where, being asked, ‘at what time did you own the brig Abigail, and when did you cease to own her,’ answered, on oath, ‘I cannot tell exactly the time; I believe it was at the latter end of 1799 that I first owned her; I ceased to own her I rather think, in the year 1800.’ Whereas in truth and in fact, the said defendant never did own the said brig at any time during the year 1799, or before or after.

“The policy in question, was effected on the 27th of June, 1807, on goods, the property of the plaintiff, an American citizen, on board the Little William, belonging to Jacob Sperry, also an American citizen, at and from Philadelphia to Tonningen, or Hamburg, if not blockaded; warranted American property, proof whereof to be made here. She sailed on the voyage insured, on the 3d of July 1807.

“The plaintiffs filed their bill on the equity side of the court setting forth that the plaintiff Ogle is the original inventor of a new and useful improvement in the plough, for which he obtained a patent in the year 1818. That in the year 1824, he, by deed, and for a valuable consideration, assigned and conveyed to the other plaintiff all his exclusive right to the said invention, with the liberty of making, constructing, using, and vending the same toothers to be used, in and throughout the state of Pennsylvania, with a power of attorney for those purposes.

“This was an action for the infringement of a patent granted to E. Treadwell, for an improvement in forming and piercing bread, called by him ‘a cracker or biscuit finisher.’ The specification describes the different parts of the machine, amongst which are the circular cutters, the piercers, and the clearers, which cut, pierce, and clear the biscuit at one operation.