Shrider's Lessee v. Morgan

In this cause,

said, that he had ruled it in a case at Lancaster, that the lessor of the plaintiff shall not be obliged to show his title further back, than from the person who last died seised, first showing the estate to be out of the proprietaries, or the commonwealth,^[1]

It was objected to by Lewis and Glymer, that a sheriff’s deed of sale of lands, under a writ of venditioni exponas, not being recorded in the Rolls Office, according to the act of assembly of 1774, could not be read in evidence. Bed non allocatur: Because it was acknowledged *in court, pg9 and the registering of it in the prothonotary’s office (as is always *- done) is a sufficient recording within the act.^[2]

Sergeant and Lngersoll opposed the reading a deed in evidence, upon this ground : that by the act of assembly, last mentioned, all deeds not recorded in the Rolls Office, accordingto the particular directions of that act,^[3] are declared void as against subsequent purchasers ; and, therefore, though this deed was dated before the sheriff’s deed, under which the defendant claimed, yet as it was not recorded until afterwards, they insisted, it was void, and could be no evidence at all. Bed non allocatur: And McKean, C. J., said, we cannot hinder the reading of a deed, under seal, but what use will be made of it, is another thing ; and he cited the case of Ford v. Lord Gray, 6 Mod 44.^[4]