be presumed that the stamp was innocently left off, and that the party questioning the validity must show affirmatively, by other evidence, the fraudulent intent. See Desmond v. Norris, 10 Allen 250; Snell v. Moulton, 12 Id. 396; Govern v. Littlefield, 13 Id. 127; Wiley v. Robinson, 13 Id. 128; Crocker v. Foley, 13 Id. 376.

With great deference to the intimation from such high authority, to us there seems to be a difficulty in this view, in that by it the act itself is not taken into account. Every man is unquestionably to be presumed innocent till proved guilty; yet if it appear that he has done an unlawful act, we presume him to have intended the natural consequences of that act. In other words the act throws the burden on the defendant to disprove the intent. Thus, in cases of murder, "the fact of killing being first proved, all the circumstances of accident, necessity, or infirmity are to be satisfactorily proved by the prisoner, unless they arise out of the evidence proved against him; for the law presumeth the fact to have been founded in malice until the contrary appeareth:" Foster's Crown Law 255; See Commonwealth v. York, 9 Met. 93. In cases of malicious prosecution, the want of probable cause depends not upon the actual fact but the belief of the party; yet the fact being shown, the belief and malicious intent may be inferred, and "the burden put upon the defendants to rebut this presumption:" Wills v. Noyes, 12 Pick. 327; 1 Phillips on Ev. 632. And these cases are not favored in law: Stone v. Crocker, 24 Pick. 83. To constitute the crime of larceny, there must be a taking of property with an intent to appropriate it: Commonwealth v. Adams, 7 Gray 44; but the possession is primâ facie evidence of the intent: Commonwealth v. Willard, 1 Mass. 6; 1 Phillips on Ev. 634. In cases of false representations, the intention to deceive and defraud must be alleged and proved; but the falsehood uttered is sufficient proof of the intention: 1 Phillips on Ev. 633; and "where a prosecutor, on an indictment for forging a receipt with intent to defraud him, swore that he believed the prisoner had no such intent, the judge directed the jury that the defrauding being the necessary effect and consequence of the forgery, was sufficient evidence of the intent of the prisoner to warrant them in convicting; and the judges held the conviction to be right." (Id. 632.) In the case of Seymour T. Smith, bankrupt, Judge HALL, of the United States District

Court Northern District of New York, decided that the making of a general assignment, without preference, by an insolvent debtor, was an act of bankruptcy; that an express denial under oath of intent to defeat or delay the operations of the Bankrupt Act by making such assignment, was of no avail as against the conclusive legal presumption of such intent arising out of the admission of the execution of such assignment: 3 Bankrupt Reg.

98.

Prof. Greenleaf thus lays down the general principle applicable to all cases. "The law presumes every act, in itself unlawful, to have been criminally intended, until the contrary appears :" 1 Greenleaf on Ev. § 34; and this same presumption arises in civil cases: Ibid.

In the case in question, the person who issues an instrument unstamped, in violation of the revenue laws, does an unlawful act of which the natural and necessary consequences are that the provisions of the stamp act are evaded and government defrauded: and why should not this same general principle apply? Granted that the intent must be alleged and proved, yet proof of the unlawful act it would seem should make a prima facie case on the question of intent. And such appears to be the view sanctioned by some of the decisions: See Beebe v. Hutton, 47 Barb. 187.

H. H. BOND.

THE PROPRIETARY TITLE OF THE PENNS.

As the last of the male descendants of William Penn has recently deceased, it becomes interesting to review the course of transmission of the title to the soil of Pennsylvania, vested in William Penn in fee, by charter of Charles II., dated the 4th of March 1681.

William by his will, after devising ten thousand acres in the province for the three children of his deceased son William, and ten thousand acres for his daughter Aubrey, devised all his lands, tenements, and hereditaments, rents, &c., in Pennsylvania and territories thereunto belonging, or elsewhere in America, unto Hannah his wife and others, and their heirs, in trust, to sell and dispose of so much thereof as might be necessary to pay his

debts; and all the rest of his lands and hereditaments whatsoever, situate, lying and being in America, to convey to his children by his present wife, in such proportions and estate as she should think fit. This will he confirmed 27th of 3d month 1712; and it was proved 3d November 1718. See Will Book, Philadelphia, No. I., p. 238.

William Penn left children by his wife Hannah, four sons, John, Thomas, Richard, and Dennis, and a daughter Margaret. Hannah Penn, after the death of Dennis in his minority, by deed of January 7th 1725 appointed and directed conveyance of onehalf the province of Pennsylvania and of the three lower counties unto John Penn, her eldest son, and the other half equally to her sons Thomas Penn and Richard Penn, in fee.

June 24th 1735, Samuel Preston and James Logan, the surviving trustees, released said estates to John, Thomas, and Richard Penn.

On the 8th May 1732, the said three proprietaries, then owners in fee, executed articles covenanting with each other, binding themselves respectively to devise their shares to the eldest son in tail male, remainder to other sons in like manner; and if any should die without issue male, his share should go to the survivors or survivor and heirs as he should appoint; and if no appointment should be made, then it is to go equally to the survivors and their heirs male; chargeable in either case with provisions for widows and daughters. And if either of said parties should die without any issue he is to appoint his share or estate to the other of said parties or either of them as he should think fit, with power to charge certain sums thereon. And if either should die without any appointment, then his share is to go to the survivors or survivor and heirs, subject to charges in favor of any widow, and of half sister Letitia Aubrey, widow, and the children. of whole sister Margaret Freame. With power of revocation by all, or by the survivors of one dying without issue male, but without prejudice to appointments made by deceased.

On the 24th October 1746, the said John Penn made his will, which was proved September 1st 1747. He died unmarried and without issue in 1746. See Will Book II. p. 295. He devised his moiety of Pennsylvania and of the three lower counties (now state of Delaware) unto his brother Thomas Penn for life, and after his death to the first son of Thomas in tail male, and in

default of issue, to the second, third, fourth, fifth, and other sons according to priority of age in tail male; and in default of such issue, then to his brother Richard Penn for life, remainder to Richard's son John for life, and to the first son of the latter in tail male; and in default to other sons of his said nephew John Penn, according to priority of age in tail male; and then in like manner to his nephew Richard son of his brother Richard, and his sons; and in default of such issue, then unto the other sons of his brother Richard according to seniority of age in tail male. In default of such issue male, then unto his brother Thomas Penn in tail general; and in default, &c., unto his said nephew John Penn in tail general; and in default, &c., unto his said nephew Richard Penn in tail general; and so as to his brother Richard's other sons successively. With remainder to Richard's daughter Hannah for life, and to her sons successively in tail male; and then to her in tail general; and in default of such issue then to his brother Richard in tail general; and in default of such issue unto his sister Margaret Freame for life, and then to her sons in tail male, &c., &c.

The said will of John Penn, son of the first proprietary, empowered the tenant in possession of his moiety of the province and lower counties to convey and grant lands, of any estate how large soever, reserving by each grant of any lands as much quitrent in proportion and the like services as had lately been generally reserved on other lands granted out by himself and brothers, &c., the purchase-moneys and fines to go to the possessor; the quit-rents to descend and go according to the limitations of the will.

By articles of agreement between the surviving sons of the first proprietary, made January 31st 1750, Thomas and Richard Penn confirmed the articles of 1732, and they made the like power of sale in fee as in John Penn's will, applicable to their respective fourth parts of the province of Pennsylvania, &c. And by further articles between them it was agreed that if either should leave no issue male, but issue female, the latter should take their father's share before all or any of the issue female of the other. Richard Penn, son of the first proprietary, made his will, dated 21st March 1750, with several codicils, and died in 1771, leaving sons John Penn (called the elder) and Richard Penn, and daughter Hannah; and devised his share of Pennsylvania to his

son John Penn for life; remainder to John's sons successively in tail male; with further remainder to his son Richard Penn for life, and remainder to Richard's sons successively in tail male, &c., with further remainder to his son William Penn in tail male, and to William's sons successively in tail male, &c., with - remainder to testator's brother Thomas for life, remainder to his sons in tail male; with further remainders to testator's sons John, Richard, and William, and other sons for estates tail general, &c., &c. With the like power as in his brother John's will, for the person in possession to grant and convey in fee. William, the third son, died in the lifetime of his father without issue.

Said Richard Penn, the testator, left two sons, John Penn, called the elder, Governor of Pennsylvania before the Revolution, who died in 1795, without issue; and Richard Penn, who died in 1811, leaving sons William and Richard, both of whom died without issue; William in 1845 or 6; Richard in 1863; whereby the male heirs of Richard Penn became extinct.

Thomas Penn, second son of the first proprietary, on the 15th August 1751 executed a deed of release as a marriage settlement with Julianna, daughter of the Earl of Pomfret, unto David Barclay and Thomas Hyam, conveying his fourth of Pennsylvania and the lower counties, whereby an annual charge was to be raised for her for life; reciting the preceding articles, to the use of said Thomas Penn for life; remainder to the use of his first and other sons severally and successively, according to priority of birth in tail male, &c., &c., and in default of such to his brother Richard Penn for life; remainder to his son John for life, and then to his sons in tail male successively; remainder to Richard's son Richard for life, and then to his sons in tail male successively; remainder to Richard's son William, and sons in like manner; remainders to the heirs of the body of said Thomas Penn (the grantor). With a power of sale in said Thomas Penn and others in possession for the time being, to sell and convey in fee, as in his brother John's will.

Thomas Penn died in 1775, leaving sons John and Granville. This John Penn (called the younger) erected and lived in the mansion, called "Solitude," in the present Fairmount park in Philadelphia, and died in 1834, without issue. Granville died in 1844, leaving issue Granville John Penn, who became tenant in tail male of three-fourths of the Pennsylvania titles under