Inhabitants of Boston v. Tileston
This text of 11 Mass. 468 (Inhabitants of Boston v. Tileston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
As it is to be presumed, in this case, that the
officer who served the execution returned that the appraisers were disinterested freeholders, perhaps, on a trial between these parties, that fact would not have been traversable. But here the parties have agreed that the appraisers were inhabitants of the town of Boston. As such, they were parties to the suit in which the execution issued; and, as such, they were certainly not disinterested. The statute referred to by the counsel for the demandants has removed the objection of incompetency as witnesses from corporators, which shows that they were not competent at common law. But it would be going far beyond the plain and apparent intent of the legislature to extend that provision to the case of appraisers on the extent of executions. Upon a suggestion of the inconvenience of the law, as it applies to the peculiar circumstances of the town of Boston, the legislature would doubtless provide a remedy; but, until such provision is made, the rules of the common law must govern,
Demandants nonsuit.
Pearce vs. Atwood, 13 Mass. Rep. 324.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 Mass. 468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/inhabitants-of-boston-v-tileston-mass-1814.