The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1896-02-11

I Y =
the land; another that he had bought
the land for the heirs and had turned
it over to j to rent until the rents
could discharge the purchase-debt;
Held, that such evidence is sufficient TO
show an understanding that the land
was to be bought for the heirs, accord
ING to their interests, and consequent
| ~ makes w a trustee for their benefit
Affirmed.
State VS.. A. r. Surles (appellanD, from
Johnson county. Opinion by Mont
gomery, j.
In a prosecution for disposing of
mortgaged property; Held,
/. The disposal of mortgaged prop
| erty by the mortgagor without the
consent of the mortgage is prima
| facie evidence of an intent to defraud
and places the burden on the defend
ant to disprove the criminal intent
9 A count alleging a disposal with
| intent to defraud g., Business Mana
| ger" Of the Farmers Alliance EN-
change is not repugnant to another
count alleging an intent to defraud
said G., Business Manager and Agent
of said exchange.
3. The fact that G. was the business
manager Of such association may be
proven by parol, through the record OF
G's election.
A. A mortgage describing the land on
which the mortgaged crops were
grown as ''1S acres on my land in
Averasboro township, Harnett coun-
tx" is sufficient description TO sustain
conviction.
;. A chattel mortgage given for a
past debt or for supplies to be furnish
ed in the future is based upon sutfi-
cient consideration.
/ 6. Where the transcript Of an order
of removal Of a prosecution from one
county to another is insufficient the
Supreme court may, by certiorari, have
sufficient transcript sent from the
court from which the prosecution was
removed
Z. 1t is within the discretion OF the
court toallow the prosecuting attorney
to make any reflections upon the char
acter of defendant as may be warrant
ed by the evidence.
Affirmed.
Lee Formeyduyal, administrator, VS.. r.
A. Rockwell (appellant) from Co
lumbus county. Opinion by Fair
cloth, G. j.
J. The homestead right is a vested
ONE. and cannot be destroyed by any
irregularity or want of procedure in
the manner prescribed by the Code;
Hence, where homestead was allotted
TO both the widow and minor children
of the decedent, the provision for the
widow will be deemed surplusage.
?. The heir Of a judgment debtor cam
not attack collaterally a proceeding
assigning a homestead to which he was
a party; and this is especially true
where the heir has already enjoyed the
full benefit Of the homestead provis-
ion.
Affirmed
Bruce Williams, trustee, appellant
VS.. PinIney Williams ct ny. from
Duplin county Opinion by Mont
gomery, j.
1. Where, in All action to foreclose a
deed Of trust given to secure a note for
5000 the defendant pleaded usury. it
appeared that the note was payable at
a certain banking house; that the
deed was given to one s., who repre-
scented that he was the plaintiffs agent
in making the loan; and that the note
and deed We're sent by one III. to such
banking HOUSE, OH receipt u which II
sent him $780, OF which the defendants
received only S157 He testified that
defendants agreed to pay him $40;
that he was such banking company's
agent: and that he knew il was acting
with plaintiff; Held, that the question
whether such banking company was
plaintiffs agent was properly submit
ted to the jury.
q Where the court instructed the
jury to consider the whole evidence as
to the agency of such banking com
pany, and charged that if it was sim
ply broker who, at defendants in
stance, negotiated the loan with the
| plaintiff and not plaintiffs agent, plain
tiff was entitled TO recover, no matter
how exorbitant the commissions
charged; but if the company was plain
| tiff's agent, or even associated 10 busi-
ness and sharing the profits with plain
| tiff, the latter was presumed TO know
Of the usurious nature Of the trans
| action and could not recover; Held
| that plaintiff could not complain of
| such charge.
| 3. A stipulation in mortgage
| that provided for the payment Of att
| torney's fees in case of foreclosure
or suit in court, in addition TO the
! principal and interest is evidence Of
! the usurions nature Of the transaction.
Affirmed.
/ tTEIE qtyPANNY 0F THE DESK