TWENTY YEAR

TWENTY YEARS. The lapse of twenty years raises a presumption of certain 
facts, and after such a time, the party against whom the presumption has 
been raised, will be required to prove a negative to establish his rights. 
     2. After twenty years from the time it became due, a bond will be 
presumed to have been paid. 2 Cranch, 180; 3 Day, 289; 1 McCord, 145; 2 N. & 
McC. 160; 1 Bay. 482; 9 Watts, 441; 2 Speers, 357. And the same presumption 
arises that a judgment has been paid, if no steps have been taken by the 
plaintiff for twenty years after its rendition. 3 Brev. 476; 5 Conn. 1. 
     3. But the presumption of such payment is easily rebutted, by showing 
that interest has been regularly paid. 1 Bailey, 148; that the obliger has 
admitted it has not been paid 2 Harring, 124; 9 N. H. Rep. 398; or other 
circumstances calculated to rebut the presumption. The proof of facts which 
show that the obligor was poor and not likely to be able to pay the debt, is 
not sufficient. 5 Vern. 236. 
     4. When a debt is payable in installments and secured by a penal bond, 
the presumption of payment arising from lapse of time applies to each 
installment as it falls due. 3 Harring. 421. 
     5. By the English act of limitation, 21 Jac. 1, c. 16, the period 
during which a possessory action for land can be sustained is fixed at 
twenty years, so that an adverse possession of twenty years is a bar to an 
action of ejectment, and such lapse of time gives a possessory title to the 
land. This period has been adopted in many of the states of the Union, but 
there has been some variation in others. See Limitation of actions. 
     6. But this statute did not affect incorporeal hereditaments, which 
remained as before. In analogy to the act of limitation the courts presumed 
a grant after twenty years adverse possession. And new grants are presumed 
upon proof of an adverse, exclusive, and uninterrupted enjoyment of an 
incorporeal hereditament at the end of twenty years. And the burden of 
proving that the possession was adverse, that is, under a claim of title, 
with the knowledge or acquiescence of the owner of the land; and also that 
it was uninterrupted, rests on the party claiming such incorporeal 
hereditaments. 3 Kent, 441; 1 Cheves, R. 2; 4 Mason, 402; 2 Roll. Ab. 269; 2 
Greenl. Ev. 444. 
     7. The time of enjoyment of a former owner who is in privity with the 
claimant, can, in general, be joined to his own in order to make up the 
period of twenty years, as in the case of the heir and ancestor, of grantor 
and grantee. 9 Pick. 251. But the enjoyment of a former owner whose title 
has escheated to the state by forfeiture, cannot be added to the time of the 
enjoyment of the grantee of the state. 2 Greenl. Ev. 543.