932

44. Miller v. Rich, 204 I11. 444. 68 N. E. 488.

45 See editorial note 28 Harv. Law Rev. al p. 57.

In order that this doctrine, giving one constructive possession beyond the limits of his actual occupancy, may apply, the part of the land not actually occupied by him, and the part occupied, must belong to the same person, and the owner of land is not affected with notice as of a constructive possession of his land by the fact that it is included in a conveyance with other land not belonging to him, if such other land alone is occupied by the claimant.46 Were the rule otherwise, the owner of land might be deprived thereof by force of the statute of limitations, although no part was in the possession of another, and there was consequently no reason for asserting his title.

The fact that the true owner is in actual possession of part of his land prevents the application, in favor of another, of the doctrine of constructive possession by color of title as to the land not occupied by either.47 In such case the constructive possession of the true owner takes precedence over the constructive possession

46. Henry v. Brown, 143 Ala. 446, 39 So. 325; Hurdle v. In-, vestment Guaranty etc. Co., 81 Ark. 141, 98 S. W. 701; Kimball v. Stormer, 65 Cal. 116, 3 Pac. 408; Wheatley v. San Pedro, L. A. & S. L. R. Co., 169 Cal. 505, 147 Pac. 135; Tennis Coal Co. v. Sackett, 172 Ky. 729, Ann. Cas. 1917E, 629, 190 S. W. 130; Walsh v. Wheelwright, 96 Me. 174, 52 Atl. 649; Turner v. Stephenson, 72 Mich. 409, 2 L. R. A. 277, 40 N. W. 735; Leavenworth v. Reeves, 106 Miss. 722, 64 So. 660; Bailey v. Carleton, 12 N. H. 9, 37 Am. Dec. 190; Schmitt v. Traphagen, 73 N. J. Eq. 399, 133 Am. St. Rep. 739, 69 Atl. 189; Lewis v. Covington, 130 N. C. 541, 41 S. E. 677; Hicklin v. Mcclear, 18 Ore. 126, 22 Pac. 1057; Hole v. Rittenhouse, 25 Pa. St. 491;

Coal Creek Min. Co. v. Heck, 15 Lea (Tenn.) 497; Daniel v. Dayton Coal & Iron Co., 132 Tenn. 501, 178 S. W. 1187; Word v. Box, 66 Tex. 596, 3 S. W. 93; Green v. Pennington, 105 Va. 801, 54 S. E. 877; Robinson v. Lowe, 66 W. Va. 665, 66 S. E. 1001.

47. Hunnicutt v. Peyton, 102 U. S. 333, 26 L. Ed. 113; Semple v. Cook, 50 Cal. 26; Wilkins v. Pensacola City Co., 36 Fla. 36, 18 So. 20; Harriss v. Howard, 126 Ga. 325, 55 S. E. 59; Peoria etc. R. Co. v. Tamplin, 156 111. 285, 40 N. E. 960; Hopson v. Cunningham, 161 Ky. 160, 170 S. W. 522; Stearns Coal & Lumber Co. v. Boyatt, 168 Ky. 1ll, 181 S. W. 962; Schlossnagle v. Kolb, 97 Md. 285, 54 Atl. 1006: Bellis v. Bellis, 122 Mass. 414; Bradley v. West, 60 Mo. 33; Benne v.

The land in actual possession must adjoin that of which constructive possession is claimed,51 and they must, according to some decisions, be included within one description in the instrument under which the claim is made, and, if they are described or referred to as separate tracts or lots, it is immaterial that they arc both included in one conveyance.52 Occasionally the

Miller, 149 Mo. 228, 50 S. W. 824; Schmitt v. Traphagen, 73 N. J. Eq. 399, 133 Am. St. Rep. 739, 69 Atl. 189; Hall v. Powel, 4 Serg. & R. (Pa.) 456, 8 Am. Dec. 722; Renneker v. Warren, 17 S. C. 139; Sequatchie & South Pittsburg Coal & Iron Co. v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad Co., 131 Tenn. 221, 174 S. W. 1122; Jones v. Coal Creek Min. & Mfg. Co., 133 Tenn. 183, 180 S. W. 991; Claiborne v. Elkins, 79 Tex. 380, 15 S. W. 395; Langdon v. Temple-ton, 66 Vt. 173, 28 Atl. 866; Fry v. Stowers, 98 Va. 417, 36 S. E. 482.

48. But In North Carolina the constructive possession of the true owner is denied this effect. Mclean v. Smith, 106 N. C. 172, 11 S. E. 184; Currie v. Gilchrist, 147 N. C. 648, 61 S. E. 146; Simmons v. Defrance Fox Co., 153 N. C. 261, 69 S. E. 146

49. Fox v. Itinton, 4 Bibb. (Ky.) 55; Kentucky Land & Immigration Co. v. Reynolds, 22 Ky. L. Rep. 1389. 60 S. W. 635; Richie v. Owsley, 143 Ky. 1, 135 S. W. 439; Miniard v. Napier, 167 Ky. 208, 180 S. W. 363; Stull v.

Rich Patch Iron Co., 92 Va. 253, 23 S. E. 293; Garrett v. Ramsey. 26 W. Va. 345, 360 (dictum).

50. Hunnicutt v. Peyton, 102 U. S. 333, 26 L. Ed. 113; Semple v. Cook, 50 Cal. 26; Altemus v. Long, 4 Pa. St. 254, 45 Am. Dec. 688; Ament v. Wolf, 33 Pa. St. 331; Creech v. Jones, 5 Sneed (Tenn.) 631; Evitts v. Roth, 61 Tex. 81; Combes v. Stringer, 106 Tex. 427, 167 S. W. 217. See note 6 Columbia Law Rev. 583.

51. Brown v. Bocquin, 57 Ark. 97, 20 S. W. 813; Georgia Pine Inv. & Mfg. Co. v. Holton. 91 Ga. 551, 20 S. E. 434; Stephens..n v. Doe, 8 Blackf. (Ind.) 508, 4C Am. Dec. 489; Louisville Property Co. v. Lawson, 156 Ky. 288, 160 S. W. 1034; Farrar v. Eastman. 10 Me. 191; Herbst v. Merrifleld, 133 Mo. 267, 34 S. W. 571; Wilson v. Mcewan, 7 Ore. 85. Lands have been held to be contiguous within this requirement when merely a corner of one coincides with a corner of the other. Parsons v. Dils. 172 Ky. 774, Ann. Cas, 1918E, 796, 189 8. W. 1158.

Grimes v. Ragland, 28 Ga 123; Rowe v. Henderson Naval criterion in this regard has been stated to be whether the instrument shows that the two pieces adjoin one another.53

In some states there is a restriction upon the application of the rule of constructive possession, to the effect that it will apply only when the land claimed by reason of constructive possession is such, in character and extent, that its use in connection with the land actually occupied would be in accord with the custom of the country.54 In other states no such restriction upon the application of the rule is recognized, it being only necessary that the actual possession be of a visible character, however small it may be in extent in comparison with the land claimed.55

Stores Co., 143 Ga. 756, 85 S. E. 917; Hornblower v. Banton, 103 Me. 375, 125 Am. St. Rep. 300, 69 Atl. 568; Morris v. Mcclary, 43 Minn. 346, 46 N. W. 238; Den d. Carson v. Mills, 18 N. C. 546, 30 Am. Dec. 143; Doe d. Laflin v. Cobb, 46 N. C. 406, 62 Am. Dec. 173; Willamette Real Estate Co. v. Hendrix, 28 Ore. 485, 52 Am. St. Rep. 800, 42 Pac. 514; Camp v. Riddle, 128 Tenn. 294, Ann Cas. 1915C, 145, 160 S. W. 844; Montgomery v. Gunther, 81 Tex. 320, 16 S. W. 1073. Contra, Johnson v. Simerly, 90 Ga. 612, 16 S. E. 951; Dills v. Hubbard, 21 111. 328; Parsons v. Dills, 159 Ky. 471, 167 S. W. 415, 172 Ky. 774, Ann. Cas. 1918E, 796, 189 S. W. 1158; Brougher v. Stone, 72 Miss. 647, 17 So. 509; Roller v. Armentrout, 118 Va. 173, 86 S. E. 906; Webb v. Richardson, 42 Vt. 465.