Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-05-31

what Il known tho Pc6ens fts beginning at the re-
pufed Boundary OF North Carolina, and terminating at
the distance OF II miles within the limits of the paniHs
grant The land occupied by the defendant lies little
10 the west Indian side OF this line The treaty OF
relco concudedn 1893 recognizes the boundary OF the
treaty OF Holsion as having been "iawfully and
msrkcd The act of 1888. above referred TO prohi-
biting the entry OF Cherokee lands, establishes Pigeon
,cer, in what is Haywood county, as the Eastern
boundary of lhe Indian nation
la December 1871, the county of Buucombe was
tablshe and that portion OF the Cherokee nation within
the limits oil this State included within the boundary
lin. ct this county. In 1891 act of Assembly, Rev.
en- az directs in what manner all lands edst OF the ceded
territory (now the State of renucsee) may be surveyed
IN 1875 another act, CHI ioo, H. grants certain pvi.
gs TO those owning entries tceSt of Pigeon rirer. Ia
tSOy an act (ch I'D passed TO prohibit the OF
Cherokee lands aud preamble recitcs that great doubts
are entertained 10 where the present boundaries be.
tween this State and the Cherokees are, and whether the
penalties of the acts of IT'S and 1883 ull force
The counsel for the plaintiffs con,cndcd, first that the
boundary line required by the treaty OF Hols,on had
been run. That the Pickens line erroneous and in
complete, and therefore, OF validity. That the sur
veJor alter running along the y Carolina Indian bounda
ry should have stopped the 35th degree OF north ai
tude which is the boundary OF this State according to the
declaration OF Rights and is about IL miles south of me
reputed boundary OF the State, and the point which
Pickens began 10 run north. That, in consequence of
this mistake, portion of the territory Of this State, ac.
quircd bohb by tho act OF 1888 and the treaty OF Hope
in l1S5 coded to the Indians, and ces.ion obtained
from them. Much evidence offered upon this point
on both sides, which cannot be stated in sketch like
this Ii the PickeiS line is dsregarded and the survey
commenced at the 35h degree of north latitude the plain
s conended that the land dispute would lie upon the
tchit6 side of the line.
The plaintiffs counsel conendcd in the second Mac,
that he was mistaken with respect to the former point
that the prohibition in the OF rs aud S3 was in eff
feet repealed by the treaty OF olston July 1871 and
that this repeal was recognized by the Legislature the
act establishing the county OF Buncombc in December
l79l by giving to that county entry office aud nclud
ing the Indian country within her limits, by the act of
1894 with respect to the manner OF surveying lands by
the act OF l79S recognizing entries Of Pigeon river
as val and by the act OF 1919 expressing doubts whe.
thcrt iia l,,l;,
were in force
For the defendant argued, that the Pickens line
far rum correctly that whether such was
the case or not having been recognized the line
by the United States, the Indians and North Carolina in
various treaties, acts of Congress, and of the Assem-
bly, from 1897 TO the present time, and especially by the
recital in the treaty OF Teco in l79S, that the line had
been idtoMty run and marked, was under the Constu.
ton OF the United States conclusive only as between
the parties, but conclusive as TO all persons
As to the repeal by the treaty the prohtory clauses
OF the acts OF rs and 49, frequently referred to- two
Us. STROLLER, Conf Repts. 434, Srother u.s. Cathy, LIST
Murrh-) and three OF the Supreme Court of the United
States, preston Us. Bowder, l Wheat, lis, Danforh's
Lessee Thomas, idem 1855, Danlorhs Lessee ps cir
idem, 673) relied upon, she ing that contra.
ny construction had uniformly prevailed.
SPECIFIC instructions 10 the jury embracing various
points, were asked by the Counsel both Sides several
of which declined by The Court consisting of Mar.
shall, c. j. and Potter j.
The Jury instructed that the acts ~ ohibng the
entry OF Indian land in iu iorce and that there
tore, all grants within the Indian boundaries as defined
by the acts of 1888 void; that it not having been
shown that the running of the Pickens line was ever
completed the marked line though strong evidence of the
true boundary, but not conclusive, and a the reputed
boundary Of the Slate il such boundary existed (Which
was lett 10 the Jury matter for their determination
was to be regarded, and not the parallel of latitude.
The cause was taken up OH Tuesday morning, and the
day consumed in the examination of the witnesses We'd
nesday Thursday and Friday occupied by tie argu-
en OF The counsel aud the charge of the Court and on
Monday at p. Nj. verdict returned for the deien
daut
proper TO say, that the foregoing sketch is confined
to the points upon which the seemed to US ultimate
y to turn Much evidence was offered many principles
urged by the counsel and determined by Court which
we have not the ability or the space report.
The series of from which this was selected for
trial. have been pending years, and have acquired
State.
OF the ability manifested by the arguments, it is sufTi.
cient TO say that il equal TO the great impor
lance OF the cause and the high reputation the Coun-
sci.
The charge reduced to writing, and was an ex
ceedngly clear exposition OF the Law and the evidence
Ii supposed that the will he taken by writ of err
ror to the Supreme Court of the United States.
CASTOR Tor Plaintiffs Badger and the Attorney Gene
raj for Defendant Star.
United States I
.. Indictment for passing counterfeit notes
John S. Smith, the Bank OF the United States.
alias
John s. Scott.
The Prisoner was thrice tried upon bills of indictment
containing various counts, charging him with forging
vending aud passing counterfeit notes verdict of not
guilty was rendered in the first case on account of va
idhCe USt"eeh ne ana the description iuuic
menf In the second case he charged with forging
the bill, and in another with passing it, knowing il
to be forged The Court held that was no evidence
10 support the rs count, and the identity of the bill pro
duced on the trial with that passed by the prisoner not
being very clearly shown, tie jury found him not guilty.
upon both lie was ultimately convicted OF passing ano
'her bill on the same Bank, knowing be counterfeit
aud sentenced 10 seven years imprisonment.
III seems that in the month of August last the prisoner
came TO the house of Henry Carpenter in the county of
Lincoln, where he remained weeks, known as Doc
tor smith, OF virginia. and proiessed delay his Journey
on account OF his horses back having been injured Dur
ing this period he passed the in question 10 Andrew
Carpenter the OF his landlord In September or Oc
ober he went TO South Carolina and returned some weeks
afterwards TO Carpenters where his horses back being
again badly hurt he remained until he was arrested upo1
this charge in the month of December On his person the
officer who arrested him found about 500 dollars of
bank notes, and note raised from dollars ON ono
oil The banks oil virginia. He committed TO prison.
ana about two months afterwards package of
notes and check tbs principal Bank and several of the
branches OF the Bank of the United States all Of the de-
nomination OF 10 dollars and amounting to the sum of
1900 dollars, found neatly done up between boards
enclosed IN newspaper and deposited in the hay lott Of
The Stable which had been assigned him for his separae
use he prisoner had been twelve years ago at the
house OF Carpenter under suspicious circumstances and
was recognized by gentleman of this city be John s
scout whom he had known years since in Campbell
county, Virginia.
Andrew Carpenter was then put upon his trial for the
same offence aud acquitted Whcreupon the District AT.
torney entered noHc prOseqG as to the father Henry
Carpenter
Counsel for the prosecution the District Attorney and
Mr. Badger. - '
For the defendants, Mr. CASTOR and J. p Henderson
John B Mills, who was at the last term of this Court
convicted Of advising the robbery of the all and whose
# Tho Ga.