Per curiam. May 3d, 1811,

delivered the opinion of the court. No proof was offered of the existence of a deed to Williamson, according to the rules of law. The title of William, son, if the defendant relied on it, should have been proven by the best evidence the nature of the case admitted of. But this did not appear. No evidence was given, or offered, to prove why the deed to Williamson was not produced, if in fact it ever existed.

New trial refused.