intimated to Mr. Huston, that according to prior decisions, particularly in Penrose v. Griffith,(a) the recital in the patent of the Conveyance from the warrantee to the patentee Was good evidence of that conveyance against the commonwealth and all persons claiming under the commonwealth by title subsequent to the date of the patent.

Upon this Mr. Huston declined further argument, and the judgment was affirmed. .

Judgment affirmed.