The popular maxim that "possession is nine-tenths of the law," is founded on the salutary and reasonable doctrine of the law, that the party in possession of property is presumed to be the owner until the contrary shall have been proved. Consider how intolerable, and, in fact, destructive of civil society would be an opposite rule—if every one in the enjoyment of property were liable to be called upon to explain to any one challenging his right, how that right had been acquired! By the operation of the rule laid down in the text, a defendant in ejectment may (except in the case of landlord and tenant) always defeat the action, simply by showing the real title to be in some third party—without showing that the defendant holds possession with the consent, or under the authority of the real owner.—(Roe v. Harvey, 4 Burr. 2484; Doe v. Barber, 2 T. R. 749.) The defendant's evidence is thus altogether confined to falsifying his adversary's proofs, or rebutting the presumptions which arise out of them.—Adams on Ejectment, p. 319.—(3d Ed.)[513]