The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1910-09-20


- 'Over the lintels Of
our Supreme Court room. a court
hat has ever held the Wavering bal
ance right 'twixt friend and foe, how
appropriate these words would sound,
North Carolina's Supreme Court was
tho first court to declare an act OF the
Legislature unconstitutional Such an
inscription over the doors OF the Su-
pre1ne Court room of North Carolina
would indeed be fitting. 1T seems
strange that this thought had not Oc-
Cured before, and stranger still that
1t has not yet been needed. The
truth is the further the thoughtful
North Carolinian delves into the
records Of the achievements of his
own people the more thoroughly is
he convinced that we have been a
people who have ever and anon made
history, but who rarely wrote it.
Here IS one Of many striking illustra-
tons of the truth Of this assertion.
1t can hardly be claimed that Such
~nlodeSty is a virtue.
But back to the subject above sug-
gested. The layrnan as We'll as the
lawyer may we'll stop and ponder
with pride upon this event in our his
tory. 1t would hardly be an exag-
geration to say that the opinion of the
court of North Carolina above re-
~ 10 ddlIC ZIG ~ NsNiAA
and far reaching decision ever rend-
cred by any court In this country.
Looking back upon it today the facts
seem common place. Those who wish
to read them first hand, together with
the views of the court, can find the
case Of Bayard VS.. Singleton, report
ed in the first volume of North Caro-
lima Reports (1st Martin 49,. The
controversy resulting in this suit arose
just after the Revolutionary War, and
it is not hard to understand and ap-
preciate the bitter feeling which still
existed in the breast of the patriots,
who had just emerged from a bloody
war, against the Tories and those
who had deserted had gone back to
the mother country during the con-
f1ict for the freedom of these Western
colonies. Many of those, however,
who chung to England, We're naturally
the owners Of large estates. The
legislature of 1885 passed an act to
quiet the titles of those who had
bought the lands formerly owned by
these wealthy Tories, which lands,
under the law Of the State had been
cOnfiscated and authorized to be sold
by Commissioners of confiscatiOn.
Under this statute it was provided that
whenever a suit was instituted queS-
tioning the title of land derived from
the State by virtue of such cOnfisca-
ton, the party claiming title under a
Commissioner Of confiscated estates
was entitled to have the action per-
emptorilly dismissed In his favor
without further hearing upon the sim
pie filing of an affidavit that his title
was derived from the State through a
Commissioner of cOnfiscated estates
legally appointed for that purpose"
The noted case In question sQuare1y
presented to the court for construc-
ton the meaning and validity of this
statute. The plaintiffs derived their
claim Of title to a valuable lot in the
city of New Bern, through a former
adherent to the mother country. The
following extract from the record in
the case clearly sets up the plaintiffs
claim. The case appeared to be
this. Mr.. Cornwel, once an inhabi-
tant of New Bern, leaving his family
together with the premises in ques-
ton and a variety of his property in
this town, took shipping on the 10th
of August, 1875, and wen to Great
Britain where he continued to live
until sometime in the latter Part Of
the year 1777. when he came to New
York, then occupied by a British
garrison, and as a British subject came
from thence and arrived in New
Bern on the 18th of December, 1777,
and under the protection Of a British
flag. His principal design in coming
to this State at that time was to take
his wife and family with him to re-
side under the British government,
If he did not find our new governments
agreeable to his wishes. Not being
pleased with the appearance of things
here and thereupon preparing to
leave the State and carry with him
his wife and family he executed, on
board the vessel he came in a deed
to his daughter, one of the plaintiffs
(under which they claimed) for the
premises in question on the 10th Of
December, 1777." 1.-THE
says the record, "held under title de-
rived from the State by a deed from
the superintendent Commissioner of
confiscated estates The defendant
duly filed their affidavit under the
statute and made a motion to dismiss