In an action of ejectment by one who relies upon mere prior possession as the basis for his claim, the question often arises whether the defendant may avail himself of the defense of an outstanding paramount right of a third person, with whom the defendant in no way connects himself. It seems strange that centuries of litigation involving this venerable form of action should not have cleared the law upon this point; yet the cases, and even more the text-writers, still make it difficult to visualize a clear-cut legal image. Writers variously assert (1) that the claimant in ejectment must show in himself a good and sufficient title, (2) that possession is but evidence of such title and that an intruder may set up title in another and thus defeat· the plaintiff, (3) that plaintiff wins if he has a better right to possession than the defendant, though inferior to that of a third person.

This document is currently not available here.