Hawkins V. Arthur and others. valid, as if he had affixed the great seal of Great Britain to Devisees of it, or his seal of his then province of South Carolina. From that moment, the crown parted with its right and control over the soil of Saxagotha town, and became a trustee for the emigrant Germans, and their descendants for ever. He said, the time, the occasion, and the object were all worthy the consideration of the freemen of South Carolina. The time was a disastrous one; when the frontiers of this country were frequently ravaged by a murderous enemy. The occasion was to form a firm and permanent barrier to the incursions of this savage enemy; and the object was to secure to them and to their posterity, a convenient town, where they could in the time of peace, enjoy the good fellowship of society, and the mutual interchanges of commerce with each other. That the government of Great Britain stood pledged to the inhabitants of this town, to secure to them these advantages, together with freedom and religious liberty; and no doubt can be entertained, that these advantages and blessings would have been perpetuated to them and their posterity, if the government of this country had still remained under that government. The revolution in America, and establishment of independence, made a new æra, and changed the powers of government from the crown of Great Britain, to the freemen of America; and shall they be less mindful of these important rights, than the British would have been? He hoped and trusted they would not; and that the good sense and justice of the country would uphold and establish those rights, against all the speculators in the world who would endeavour to deprive the inhabitants of them. Mr. D. Hall. The moment the royal faith was pledged to the Germans, for the reservation of this town for their use, it was tantamount to a warrant of survey for vacant lands. When it was run out by the surveyor-general, it Devisees of Hawkins v. others. was similar to a return of the surveyor-general into the secretary's office; and when it was returned to the governor Arthur and and council, and entered in the council books and confirmed on their part on behalf of the crown, it was as solemn a transfer of the right of the crown to the inhabitants of the town, as a grant under the great seal of Great Britain. Consequently, any grant for the same lands afterwards, was null and void; as much so, as a junior grant for the same lands would have been, if they had been granted to a private individual. There was one circumstance, he said, which had not been accounted for in this transaction, which had made an impression on his mind, and that was, that the land in fob Marion's grant, was stated to be situated on Santee river. Whereas, this land was on the Congaree river, at least thirty miles above the junction of the two rivers; which conveyed to him the idea, of a misrepresentation in the location of the land, which was a strong badge of fraud, and was of itself alone sufficient to render it a very suspicious transaction in the origin. BAY, J. in charging the jury told them, it was necessary for them to determine whether there ever was this reservation for the town of Saxagotha by the crown of Great Britain, or not? If so, then the inhabitants of Saxagotha township, for whose use and benefit it was reserved, were most unquestionably entitled to it; and that there was this reservation most evidently appeared by the plat produced, which had every appearance of authenticity attached to it. In the first place, there must have been an order of council made to have this town surveyed and laid out, otherwise the surveyor-general would never have proceeded to make it. In the next place, it appears from the face of the plat as well as from the testimony of the two surveyors, that this town must have been actually run out by metes and bounds by the surveyor-general, as directed by the governor and council. Again, the uses and purposes for which it was surveyed and laid off, is most evident from the lots Hawkins V. Arthur and others. laid down on the plat, and the streets and squares laid off Devisees of for public purposes. All which was confirmed by the return of the original plan to the governor and council, and the entry or record thereof in the council books, which appears to have completed this reservation. And this again is further confirmed by the building of two churches on the spot delineated on the plat, for that purpose, and the grants of the town lots annexed to the farms or plantations throughout the township. All these circumstances combined, formed such a mass of testimony in favour of this reservation, that the mind of man could not get over it. As to the legal effect of this reservation, there could be no question about it. It amounted to a covenant in law, between the crown and the people, for whose use and benefit it was intended; that the land contained within the bounda ries of that plat, should for ever thereafter be appropriated and disposed of, for the use and benefit of the inhabitants of the said town and township, and their heirs for ever, and to and for no other intent and purpose whatsoever. It was as solemn an act on the part of the government, as any grant could be under the great seal of the province; and any grant for the same lands afterwards must have been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation, and therefore null and void to all intents and purposes, as much as any junior grant obtained for land which had been formerly granted. It appeared to him, that the king of Great Britain became a trustee for the use of the said inhabitants, as soon as the reservation was completed, until the whole of the lots were granted away among the said inhabitants and their descendants, and so remained till the revolution was accomplished; when the state of South Carolina succeeded to the trust, and now holds in trust all the ungranted lots and common, for the use of the inhabitants of the said town and township; and that no other appropriation can be made of said land, but for the use of the said inhabitants, agreeable to Hawkins Devisees of the true intent and meaning of the crown and people, when the said reservation was originally made. Arthur and others. The jury retired, and after remaining in their room a short time, returned a verdict for the defendants. A notice of a motion for a new trial was then given by the plaintiffs' counsel, but it never was afterwards brought forward. They acquiesced in the verdict, and abandoned their claim. Charleston District, 1798. In a declaration for slander, there NATHANIEL BLISS NEAL against PHILIP LEWIS. SLANDER. Verdict for plaintiff. Motion in arrest where of judgment. some counts are The declaration in this case contained several counts: good and o- counts. A man may in. sert as many counts as he 2. For calling him a damned swindler. 3. For calling him rascal, thief and scoundrel. 4. For repeating that plaintiff's bills had been protested in pleases, and if England, and that he was unworthy of credit. any one good, it is suf is After a very long trial, and a great deal of testimony ficient. on both sides, the jury found a general verdict against the ges are very defendant, with 3,000 dollars damages, without distinguish Unless dama outrageous, Court will not ing on which of the counts in the declaration they founded grant a new trial in slan- their verdict. der. This was, therefore, a motion in the first place in arrest of judgment; or, if the court should not think proper to grant that motion, then for a new trial. In support of the motion in arrest of judgment, it was contended, that this declaration contained several distinct counts, separate and independent of each other, some of which were actionable, and the others not actionable; and as the jury have found a general verdict on the whole, without distinguishing on which their verdict for such large damages was founded, whether on the counts that are actionable or not, the verdict was void in law for uncertainty. That any judgment entered up on such a verdict would be erroneous, as peradventure it might be on the counts which were not in themselves actionable. It would, therefore, be a kind of hazarding cast to find out on which of them the defendant had been found guilty; and no person, from the perusal of the record, could tell what was really the law in regard to actionable words or not. It would appear to be so vague and indefinite, that there could be no coming at any thing like certainty from it; or, for aught that appeared, the jury might have given 500 dollars on the first count, 1,000 on the second, 500 again on the third, and, lastly, 1,000 on the fourth and last count; so that, in reality, they might have taken upon them to say that every count in the declaration was actionable, against every principle of law upon that subject. If, however, the court should be of opinion that the above grounds were not sufficient in law to arrest the judgment, the counsel for the defendant urged, that his client was well entitled to a new trial. First, for excessive damages, beyond all proportion to any injury the plaintiff could have sustained by occasion of speaking any of the words charged; and also because the judge who tried the case had not clearly distinguished to the jury, and explained to them the nature of the counts, and pointed out those which were actionable, and those which were not so; when it was highly presumable if he had done so, the jury might have been induced to find very small damages, if any at all, for the plaintiff; but by suffering them all to go to the jury, they went with accumulated weight against defendant, which may have induced them to give such outrageous damages. Whereas, should the court now send it back to another jury, to whom these necessary explanations might be Neal Lewis |