2 Watts 343 | Pa. | 1834
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
the parties proposed to be made defendants, it is a decisive objection that they have not a title to the damages, which, beiDg in compensation of an injury in the nature of a trespass, could not pass by a conveyance of the land. In like manner the conveyance of a party wall does not entitle the grantee to contribution from the adjoining owner, it being held in Hart v. Kucher, 5 Serg. & Rawle 1, that the claim is satisfied by payment to the first builder, though the purchaser had not notice of it; and on the same principle, it was held in the Commonwealth v. Sheppard, 3 Penns. Rep. 509, that the claim to compensation under the act for adjusting titles to land in Bedford and Ulster townships, in Luzerne and Lycoming counties, is personal, and does not pass by a conveyance of the land. Granting the compensation here to be what it certainly is, the price of a perpetual easement, it is impossible to imagine a title to it in a subsequent grantee of the land subject to the easement.
But taking the proposed defendants to be the persons entitled, and taking the Union Canal Company to have succeeded to the responsibilities as well as the rights of the Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation, what title has any one but the company to demand judgment? ' It is said that both parties have an interest—the company in the land to be acquired, and the owner in the price to be paid for it. That construction would make the inquisition a contract which both parties would have an equal right to enforce; and this leads to an inquiry into its nature and extent. By (he act of incorporation, the company was authorised to agree with the owners of land necessary to be occupied for the purposes of the work; bu t in case of disagreement it was authorised to do what? Simply to apply to the justices of the supreme court for writs of ad quod damnum, as a measure of precaution, to' ascertain- beforehand the damages to be incurred by an adverse appropriation ; and the court was required, on being satisfied that the writ was duly executed, to enter judgment at the return of the inquisition, “ that the said company, paying to the several owners, as aforesaid, the several sums of money in (he said inquisition assessed, or bringing the same into court, shall
Rule discharged.