Supreme Court
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NORTH CAROLINA REPORTS. VOL. 8. CASES ARGUED AND BDJUDGED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA. DURING 7820 AND 7821. THE FQRMER PART BY THOMAS RUFFIN. THE LATTER BY FRANCIS L. HAWKS. AXNOTATED BY WALTER CLARK. REPRINTED FOR THE STATE BY COIMERCIAL PRINTINGCOMPANY. RALEIGH,N. C., 1910. CITATION OF 'REPORTS. Rule 62 of the Supreme Court is as follows: Inasmuch as all the Reports prior to the 63d have been reprinted by the State, with the number of the volume instead of the name of the Reporter, counsel will cite the volumes prior to 63 N. C. as fol- lows : 1 and 2 Martin 9 Iredell ?w Taylor & Conf. ) N' " 10 " . '6 2 4' 1 Haywood 11 " 4' 4' 3 4' <' 2 " 1% " 1and2 Car. Law Re- ,, ,, 13 " posifory & IC.Term 1 1 " Eq. I Murphey 2 " 2 " 3 " 3 " 4 " ' 1 Hawks 5 " 4' 4' 2 " 6 " 3 " 7 '< 4 " 8 " 1 Devereux ?jaw Busbee Law 2 " " Eq. 3. " '< 1 Jones Law 4 " '< 2 'I " 1 " Ea. 3 6' 4' '6 2 " 4 " " 1 ~ev.'&Bat. Law 5 " " 2 " 6 " " 4' 4' 3&4 " 7 " " 1 Dev. & Bat. Eq. S " " 2 " " '6 1 Iredell Law 21 :: E,p. 2"" 3 " " 4 ", " 3 " " 4 " " 5 " " 5"" 6 " " 6 " " 1 and 2 Winston 7 . " " Phillips Law 8 " " ' Eq. In quoting from the reprinted Reports counsel will cite always the marginal (i,e., the original) paging, except 1 N. C. and 20 N. C., which are repaged throughout, without marginal paging. JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT. DURING THE TIME OF THESE REPORTS. CHIEF JUSTICE : JOHN LOUIS TAYLOR. JOHN HALL. LEONARD HENDERSPN. A. D. MURPHEY." C ATTORNEY-GENERAL : WILLIAM DREW. CLERIC : ................ REPORTERS : THOMAS RUFFIN. FRANCIS L. HAWKS. MARSHAL : SHERIFF OF WAKE * Hon. A. D. Murphey, Judge of the Superior Courts, presided dur- ing the June Term, 1820, in several causes instead of Judge Hender- son, who had been concerned in them at the bar. iii JUDGES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 1820 and 1821. * * Resigned 1820. t Elected 1820. PREFACE. The cases reported in this volume were prepared in part by the former Reporter: the result of Mr. RUFFIN'S labors will be found in the first 248 pages of the book. The residue of the volume is by the present Reporter ; and? prepared as it was under many disadvantages, he is aware that it is not exempt from im- perfections. Few of the arguments were heard by him, as they were made at a period when it was not his duty to report them; and, with all the assistance which has been kindly afforded him by the gentlemen of the bar in furnishing their notes, he has yet to regret that in many instances briefs were entirely lost, and it was not possible in others to learn more of the argument than the name, perhaps, of some solitary case referred to. Anxious, since his appointment, to present as speedily as possible the unreported decisions of the Court to the profession, he had but little opportunity of revisal before publication. He aimed only at fidelity as a Reporter; and he cannot but believe there are defects, which, though now obvious to himself, yet were not so readily perceptible to a mind wearied with almost constant appli- cation to the business. With this statement, however, he sub- mits the work to the candor of his brethren, and the object of his ambition will be attained should it to them be useful. To some it may seem necessary to explain the insertion in the volume of cases apparently unimportant, as involving principles the most common and of the most familiar application. The recollection of the members of the bar will readily furnish an apology. The act under which the Reporter is appointed leaves him no dis- cretion, but enjoins the publication of all the cases. ,NEWBERN, July, 1823. CASES REPORTED. d PAGE PACE Horton v . Hagler ........... 48 Ainsworth v . Greenlee ....... 190 Hunter v . Williams ......... 221 dllemong v. Allison ......... 325 Armstrong v . Arrington ..... 11 drmstrorlg v . Wright........ 93 Austin v . Rodman ........71. 194 Johnston v. Taylor .......... 271 Avery v . Walker ............ 140 Jones v . Frazier ............ 379 Justices v . Crawford ..... 16, 241 Bank v . Clark .............. 36 Bank v . Pugh ............... 198 Lanier v. Stone ............. 329 Blount v . Blount ............ 365 Locke v . Alexander ......... 412 Brocket v . Foscue ........... 64 Lockhart v . Harrington...... 408 Bryan v . Simonton .......... 51 Love v . Wall ............... 313 Lynch v . Ashe .............. 338 Carter v . Sheriff ............ 483 Cobb v . Wood ............... 95 Mann v . McVay .............226 Mann v . Vick ...............427 Manning v . Sawyer ......... 37 BI'Erwin v . Benning ......... 474 Davidson v . Davidson ....... 163 WQueen 11 . Btlrns........... 476 Delacy v . Navigation Co ..... 274 Murry v . Sermon............ 56 Denby v . Hairston .......... 315 Murry v . Smith ............. 41 Myrick v. Bishop ............ 485 Edwards v . Massey ......... 369 Erwin v . Sumrow ........... 472 Navigation Co . v . Benton .... 422 Nixon v . Potts ..............469 Nunnery v . Cotton .......... 222 Foster v . Cook .............. 509 Frazier v . Felton ............ 231 Odom v . Thompson .......... 58 Orbison v . Morrison ......... 467 Governoi v . Jeffreys ......... 207 Governor v . Matlock ......... 425 Gregory v . Hooker .......... 394 Griffin v . Graham ........... 96 Palmer v . Popelston ......... 307 Gully v . Gully .............. 20 Price v . Sykes .............. 87 Pritchard v . Sawyer......... 337 Ham v . Martin.............. 423 Harkey v . Powell ............ 17 Rambaut v . Mayfield ........ 85 Harrison v . Burgess ......... 384 Reel v . Reel ................ 248 Herrin v . M'Entyre ......... 410 Reynolds v . Putney ......... 318 Holloway v . Lawrence....... 49 Ryden v . Jones .............497 CASES REPORTED . I PAGE PAGE S. v . Saunders ............. 355 8. v . Scott .................124 S. v . Tackett .............. 210 Saunders v . Hyatt .......... S. v . Taylor ............... 462 Smith v . Neale .............. S. v . Wynne ............... 451 Scroter v . Harrington ....... S. v . Yarborough ........... 78 Snead v . Creath............. Stephenson r. Jacocks ....... 285 Spiers v . Alexander ......... Stout v . Wren .............. 420 S. v . Allen ................. S. v . Ben .................. S. v . Rrickell .............. S. v . Cain ................. Tate v . O'Neale .............418 S. v . Dalton ............... Tate v . Southard............ 45 S. v . Farrier ............... Thompson v . England ....... 137 S. v . Goode ................ Tisdale v . Gandy ............ 282 S. v . Haney ............... Trotter v . Howard .......... 320 S. v . Howorth ............. Tyson v . Rasberry........... 60 S. v . Kearney .............. S. v . M'Carson ............. S. v . M'Dowell ............. R . v . McLeod .............. Walker v . Campbell ......... 304 S. v . Poll .................. Weaver v . Parish ........... 319 S. v . Roberts .............. West v . Kittrell ............. 493 S. r . Robinson ............. White v . Morris............. 301 S. v . Rutherford ........... Wilson v . Simonton ......... 482 vii CASES CITED . Anonymous ........................2-243 ....................306 Carson v . Noblet ....................4--13 6. ................... 303 Gaither v . Mumford .................4-600 ................323, 324 Keddie v . Moore ...................:6-- 41 ....................482 McRee v . Houston ..................7--429 ................323, 343 Pipkinv.Coor ......................4-- 14 .................... 424 Skinner v . Skinner ..................7-53 5. ................... 341 Slocumbv. Anderson ................4- 77 .................... 74 Smith v . Kelly ......................7-50 7. ................... 335 S. v . Greenwood ....................2-141 .................... 28 Stephenson v . Jacocks ...............7-558 .................... 297 U . S. v . Holtsclaw ...................3-379 .................... 10 CASES ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA. JUNE TERM, 1820. THE STATE v. JAMES DALTON. 1. A paper writing in these words, "Received of J. D. ltis book account in full.-4. L.," is a receipt for moneg within Laws 1801, c. 6, it being proved, that at the day it bears date, J. D. was indebted to J. 1,. in a sum of money upon open account. So likewise these words, "Received the above in fuZ1," at the foot of an account. 2. All debts are to be understood as received or paid in money, unless explained by some other circumstance. INDICTMENTfor forgery, from RUTTIERFORD,under the act of Assembly passed in 1801, ch. 6, and charged that the prisoner forged a certain acquittnnte and receipt for money in the words and figures following, that is to say, "September 8, 1816. Re- ceived of James Dalton his book account in full. John Logan," with intent to defraud said Logan. It was proved upon the trial that on 3 September, 1816, the prisoner was indebted to Logan in . the sum of $7 by book account, for which he was warranted and judgment obtained before a justice of the peace. The prisoner then warranted Logan for the same money, alleging that he had before paid it, a~din proof thereof he offered the said paper- writing in evidence. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and he moved for a rule for a new trial upon the ground that the said paper-writing was not an acquittance or receipt for money within the meaning of the statute, which was refused and sentence passed on the prisoner, who appealed therefrom ( 4 ) to this Court. The case was submitted without argument. TAYLOR,C. J. The sole question is whether the paper-writing which the prisoner has been convicted of forging is a receipt for money, within Laws 1801, ch. 6. The necessary effect of setting