Cur. adv. vvlt.
( 249 )
had expired. No such proof was here adduced, and proof of titlethereby fails, even allowing that the other defect in the first lineof certificate was cured by the oral testimony.
Then, has defendant proved title by prescriptive possession?He is brother of plaintiff’s deceased husband, and has to give clearproof that he has created by possession adverse to her a titlesuperseding that which originally belonged to her husband. Inview of the evidence adduced by the plaintiff, I cannot say thathe, as defendant, has apparently been careful to swear distinctly,in addition to his evidence “ I possessed ” (which of course inone sense he, as a male, would do, and she would not), that heretained the whole benefit of the cultivation for himself forover ten years.
I do not assume or suspect aught against him. I say only hehas failed in his proof to show plaintiff has been divested ofwhatever title she originally had.
I affirm with costs.

September 86Bbowhb,A.J.