In June, 186S, by deed of gift, P granted to his son, F, an emplacement, described by metes and bounds and stated to have thirty feet frontage, " tel que le tout est actuellement
*
* * et que Pacquereur dit bien connatre " declaring, in the deed, that the donation had actually been male in 1860, although no deed had been executed, and that since then F had been in possession as owner and erected the buildings thereon.
Under this donation the donee and his vendees claimed title to thirty-six feet frontage as having been actually occupied by him and them since F took possession as owner in 1860, and also that plaintiff had acquired a prescriptive title by ten years possession without title, at the time of the action in 1897 to recover postession of the six feet then in occupation of the defendant, whon plaintiff alleged tobe a trespasser.
Held, that the deed in 1863 operated as an interruption of prescription and limited the title to the thirty fI et of frontage as therein described.
The plaintiff's wife purchased from F in 1885 by deed describing the emplacement in a manner simi!ar to tI e description in the donation, but also making reference to its number on the Cadastral Plan of the Parish which described it as of greater width.
Held, that the description in the deed of 1885 left the true limits of emplacement subject to determination according to the title held by the plaintiff's auteur which granted only thirty feet of frontage ; that by the registered title, the plaintiff was charged with :-Taschereau, Gwynne, Sedgewick, King and Gironard JJ.