Semi-weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1852-1853, 1853-07-06

A1tcctupe however, IN ItiAts 3Ss", q
about to leave HilIsborough for Wake and franklin,
and as he said for the low country, received this
win from Stephen Moore and took with him.
On the 10Th he arrived in Raleigh, at the Hotel
of Cant. Lawrence, where he had a conversation
with George Fisher, in which he declared that he
intended to give his property to DR.. Outlaw. On
the next day, the goth, he went to Clayton Lees
near RoIesville; and in the month of February he
was in Louisburg, where he had conversation
with Sheriff Harris, relative to an execution in his
hands ainst DIR. Outlaw, in which the express
ions used were nearly similar. But, from the 18th
to the l4th March following, he was at William
Holloway's, in Wake county, at whose house he
had been in the habit of staying occasionally during
fourteen years and whose relations with the deceased
were intimate. In conversation he referred to the
will written by Stephen Moore, which he said he
had then in his trunk and remarked, if any thing
happend to him, George Hurdle knew what to do
with it, and he would find enough to satisfy him
for all his trouble; at the same time complaining
of Dr. Outlaws troubling him for his money. A
few days after, referring to the small red trunk
which contained his valuable papers, he told Clay
ton Lee, if anything happened to him, that trunk
was to be sent to Ben. uurdle-he enjoined the
same upon William Jeffreys, at whose house he
staid about this time, and with whom he left the
trunk for a while.
This brings us down to the 18th or 10Th of
March, 1s49. on one of which days he reached
Dr. Outlaws house in Franklin County. 1t ap-
peared in evidence that he reached there complain
ing of pain in the shoulder and breast-rheu-
matte pains, probably brought on by sickness of
the stomach, as he declared to one of the witness
es that his diet had disagreed with him. Upon
the road, on Saturday, the 18th, he was seen by
Mr.. Coppedge, when he evinced great desire to
reach the Dr's. on Sunday, the 18Th, he took to
his bed and died on Wednesday morning, the 2lst.
Every attention appears to have been paid to him
by the Doctor and his family and the only ex-
pressons used by him on his death bed, are de-
tailed in the evidence of VIM. Outlaw, son of the
Dr., who deposed that the deceased told him he
had made great many wills, but now had his
property fixed so as to suit him exactly. He also
proved that it was the habit of the deceased to
deliver his trunk of papers to his mother for safe
keeping and that he did so on this last visit to
his fathers house.
Mr. D. w. Spivey, who lived in Louisburg, was
an intimate friend of the deceased, and was sent
for before but did not reach DR.. Outlaws until
after his death, and present at the burial. He
testified to examining the small trunk, and finding
the paper writing among the bonds and receipts
which it contained. In this testimoney, he was
supported by the evidence of Clifton Collins and
young Outlaw, and the affidavit of Sherwood Ev-
ans. Mr. SPivey put mark upon the back of
this paper, and was a witness when it first
propounded for probate.
We understood that all evidence from compari-
son of handwriting ruled out by the Court
and when counsel for the Caveators proposed to
read a number of letters for the purpose of show
ing that the custom of deceased always WIS to
write the abbreviated word it's and never the words
1t is, the two first words of this paper writing, the
Court decided that, although they could not be
read for this particular purpose, yet once being put
into the case, they might be used for any and all
purposes.
Mcssrs. MOORE, McRAE, and MILLER addressed
the Court and jury on behalf of the Plaintiff. The
law OF the State regulating the making of wills,
was to be found in the Act of Assembly of 1884
under the latter clause of the first section of which
this paper was propounded as valid will. The
clause provides that {" such last will shall be found
among the valuable papers of any deceased person,
or shall have been lodged in the hands of any per-
son for safe keeping and the same shall be in the
hand writing of such deceased person, and his name
subscribed thereto, inserted in some part of such
will, and if such handwriting is generally known
to the acquaintance of such deceased person, and
it shall be proved by at least three credible wit
nesses that they verify believe such WILL and every
part thereof, is in the handwriting of the person
whose will it appears to be, then and in that case
such will shall be sufficient in law to convey suf
fcient estate in landsJ tenements, and heredita-
ments."
The counsel for the plaintiff argued, from the
testimony first that they had sufficiently proved
the handwriting by large number of witnesses
who had seen the deceased write, who had cores
ponded with him for years, who had been engaged
in many business transactions with him, ultimately
acquainted with him, and whom he was in the
habit of consulting with and relying upon for ad-
vice as well hospitality. Not only from the gen
eral appearance of the paper, but from its peculiar
ties, were they convinced that it was his usual
natural, general handwriting; and they relied up.
- +l1