p. 336dence) in fee; and that the 5080 acre tract had been surveyed and laid out into twenty-four lots, numbered from 1 to 24 inclusive. The deed then conveyed lots No. 13 and 19 in this tract, to Schermerhom and Glen. The defendant was in possession of 15 acres of land, being part of the west half of lot No. 19, situate in Charlton, Saratoga county, and the plaintiff claimed to recover an undivided share of the 15 acres. The plaintiff also gave in evidence a deed from John Glen, dated January 15, 1787, by which .he released and conveyed his interest ' in the two lots to Ryer Schermerhom in fee. Ryer Schermerhom died in 1793, having by his will, dated 8th August, 1792, devised several parcels of land in Schenectady and elsewhere to his children; and having also devised the lots in question to his six children in equal shares for life, with remainder in fee to the children of each devisee. Questions were made upon the construction of this devise and the proof of the will, which need not be stated. Jeremy, one of the sons and devisees of Ryer Schermerhom, died in 1836, leaving eight children, of whom the plaintiff is one. Ryer Schermerhom was never in possession of the whole or any part of the lots in question, nor did it appear that his grantors or devisees had ever been in possession. Bartholomew Schermerhom, one of the sons and devisees of Ryer, testified that other real estate (not being part of the lots in question) had been held under the will. He also testified that he “ had some of the lands in the said lots No. 13 and 19 under the Glen deed, and sold it since testator’s death.” The defendant moved for a nonsuit on the ground, among others, that no title or possession had been shown in Ryer Schermerhom or his grantors. The motion was overruled ; and after other questions had been made, a verdict for the plaintiff was taken by consent, subject to the opinion of the court on a case. The plaintiff now moved for judgment upon the verdict.
‘ H. V. D. Yan Epps, for the plaintiff.
W. Hay, for the defendant.
p. 337By the Court,Aside from the recitals in the deed from Lefferts and others in 1773, there is no evidence that they had any paper title to the 5080 acre tract; and neither they nor their grantees, so far as appears by this case, have ever been in possesion of any portion of the land. Ryer Schermerhorn never entered under the deed from them and the release from Glen, nor have his devisees ever been in possession. I do not understand from the testimony of Bartholomew Schermerhorn, the son of Ryer, that he had ever been in possession; but only that he had, or was entitled to a portion of lots No. 13 and 19 as devisee, and had sold the land since the .testator’s death. It does not appear that his grantee ever entered.
Proof that other lands, not being part of the two lots, had been held under the will, may have been proper evidence for the purpose of establishing the will; but it had no tendency to prove that the testator had title to the lots in question.
Where possession has been taken under an ancient deed, the recitals in it may sometimes be resorted to for the purpose of presuming a grant or a pedigree in accordance with the facts recited. (Jackson v. Russell, 4 Wendell, 543. S. C. in error, 22 Wendell, 277. Carver v. Jackson, 4 Peters, 83, 4. Stokes v. Dawes, 4 Mason, 268.) But here, the defendant is a stranger to the title under which the plaintiff claims; and the recitals in the deed of Lefferts and others are not evidence against him, without showing that the land, or seme portion of it at the least, has been held under the deed.
It is of course unnecessary to enquire whether the will of Ryer Schermerhom was duly proved, or what title passed under it.
Judgment for defendant.