The evidence is perfectly admissible under the circumstances of this case—and the possession is good evidence of a fee will the contrary appear.
Willis v. Smith, 1 N.C. 21, 1 Mart. 21 (1789)
Sept. 1789
·
North Carolina Superior Court
1 N.C. 21, 1 Mart. 21
Salisbury,
September Term, 1789.
WILLIS versus SMITH.
This was an ejectment brought on a deed from the state for lands sold by the commissioners of confiscated property, formerly belonging to H. E. M’Culloch. The Counsel for the plaintiff set up their deed from the date, and then relied on the possession of M'Culloch as evidence of the fee; the original deed to M'Culloch, being carried by him beyond sea, and the records in the Register’s-office destroyed. They also shewed a plot, and an abstract taken in a list of M'Culloch’s deeds, and proved the execution of a deed to M'Culloch, with possession for several years; the abstract was sworn to and the plot also—This evidence was objected to by the defendant’s counsel, requiring the original deed to be produced.
The counsel for the plaintiff relied upon Buller, 228, 254, Salk. 288, 1 Mod. 117, Douglass, 572, Viner, Evid. 231, 2, 3, 4. As to what possession evidence of a fee, they produced and relied on the case of Cowper 595, Buller 103, Salk. 421.
Moore and Davie, for the plaintiff.
Martin, M'Coy and Stokes, for the defendant.