Case ID: nc_3/html/0139-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      laylor, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Swaine vs. Bell and Bellune.
    Tj'JECTMENT. The boundaries of the patent under which •*-* the defendant claimed, were, beginning at the mouth o>; Cape-Fear, thence along the sea coast t© Lockwood’s Folly Inlet, then up a creek within the inlet along the western branch of said creek to the head thereof, thence a north-east course ts> Elizabeth river, thence down the said river to the beginning:. It was contended that the other creek or eastern branch was the boundary to the head thereof. North 45 east, would not, strike Elizabeth river, though a course to the north of east would.
   laylor, Judge.

A natural boundary is always adhered to when called for. It cannot be altered as artificial boundaries may, by the marking of new lines, defacing marks or the decay of trees ¡ — -.therefore the western branch is to be taken to be the boundary. As to the next course it, matters not that a northeast course was called for ; had it been a western course, which, would have gone directly from Elizabeth river, still we must have proceeded from the head of the creek to Elizabeth river, that being a natural boundary, and the course is not to be regarded. As to the possession, it makes no title for the plaintiff or defendant, unless it has been under a colour of title.