Figg

The action is ejectment for a portion of the sixteenth section; and so far as the case shows, the defendant is a mere intruder without title or color of right. The plaintiff relies, 1st, upon a duplicate receipt issued by the receiver of the proper local United States land office, to one Ayres, certifying that he had made full payment under the Pre-emption Act of 1841, for the land in controversy; which receipt was assigned to the plaintiff before the commencement of the action; 2d, upon certificates of purchase issued in due form by the state of California to Cox and Ajares, for the same land, and which certificates were also duly assigned to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff contends that the receiver’s duplicate receipt is a “certificate of purchase” in the sense of section 1925 of *25 the Code of Civil Procedure, and under that section is prima facie evidence of title, except as against one in the adverse possession at the date of the certificate; and it is not pretended that the defendant comes within that category. 3d, that if the receipt is not to he deemed a certificate of purchase, the plaintiff is entitled to recover under the certificates of purchase issued by the state;…