M'Ilvaine v. Coxe's Lessee

THIS cause was now argued again by Duponceau and Ingersoll, for the plaintiff in error, and by Rawle and E. Tilghman for the defendant. The report of the former argument1 * having been so full, it is deemed unnecessary to state more of the argument, at this term, than will be sufficient to show the points to which additional authorities are addressed.