The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1914-03-10
by WALTER CLARK, JR.)

,be First and Second Districts relate
,e,rs most of the timber in Eastern
North Carolina has been sold and
much ligitation has resulted from dis
mites over the title to the timber
ard a. TO the boundaries of tracts
of land.
case of some Importance to
school authorities is School Trustees
T. Hinton. which holds that private
property may be condemned for the
purpose of building a school thereon,
when authority is conveyed by an act
Of the Legislature. There would seem
not 10 have been much doubt about
this proposition, but in any event this
ease authoritatively settles the ques-
zion.
Brugden Y. Gibson is of interest to
real stale agents In purchasing land
Cor others under a verbal agreement
that such parties shall pay for the
land. the agents receiving COMMITS
sions OF part profits on the subsequent
sale,
The criminal cases are interesting
but bring forth no e principles.
Carter Y. Strickland emphasizes the
tact that one Of the principles in con
strung wills has been decidedly
changed in recent years.
I've vi Ill ~ ooW1l
This term, by the Supreme Court, ex-
repting those reported last week in
The News and Observer, are reported
uoW. Several cases were dismissed
FOR failure to comply with the rules
and two cases because n Of the
Justices did not sit and the other
four Justices divided equally.
Civil Actions as to Land.
Sullivan v. BlOunt from Martin
county is an action To recover the
value Of timber trees cut by the Ply
mouth Lumber Company on certain
Sand. 1t was admitted hat the trees
we're cut, the question presented in
lhiS case being as to the ownership OF
the land. Both plaintiff and defend
ant claimed they owned the land and
were entitled to the value of the trees
cut Verdict and judgment for plain
iii and appeal by defendant.
Plaintiff introduced evidence that
certain persons, now dead, who own
ed adjoining land had stated that a
certain holly bush was the corner
And also introduced evidence that by
COMMON reputation, this particula,
molly bush was recognized as the cor
ner. Defendant objected and was
~overTuled.
Justices Allen for the court states
ut is well settled in this State tina
are competent as to tn
location of lines and corner when !
appears % that the declarant is deat
Al The time the declaration is OfTeret
rs evidence, CD that the declaration
was made before q controversy ha'
arisen as TO the boundary, (3) tina
The ~declarant was disinterested at tn
umc the declaration was made.
The fact hat the declarant owns a,
adjoining tract OF land o. not rep
der The declaration incompetent TN
tess made in his own interest" Tha
'he evidence in this case was com
petcnt.
Justice Allen states further: 1T
equally we'll settled hat evidence {
conmo or general reputation is con
petcnt in the location OF private bou1
darS if IL the, reputation had i
origin at n time Comparatively remot
anu ~ existed before the cOntr'
'erSS and attached itself to. son
monument of boundary, or natur'
object OF Is supported by evidence
occupation and acquiescence tendlr
- give the land some fixed and del
mite location" That remote h
neen held to mean reputation 4
'ofiy ~ fifty years. He adds: -
may DE we'll Co note that evidence
reputation only applies to QueStlo
~ boundary, and that it is not admls
Die 10 prove h ownership of t
' b1 Iu'ii 80 lL go, p:
Competent and judgment below
plaintiff is affirmed.
Coitrain y. Dennis simmons Lui
Der u. ct all, is All action for treSpa
ana to recover possession OF Lar
liotn parties claim the land from
common source, the only question
ING whether the deed to the plant
embraced q fifty acre tract OF ial
" is admitted that the deed convey
iVo tracts of land, and the quests
- whether il conveyed q third tn
~ Nfty acres. Mary #. Coitrain, I
plaintiff. claims under deed from
husband, IT.. A.. COltrain, who is n
confined in the insane asylum 8
represents him as next friend as "
~ suing in her own behalf
'"ltrain, . witness for the i,itll
was asked on crOSS-eNanlinatl'
pa the deed to you cover part
me land described in the deed to Y.
1alher:' h question was in rel
ehce to land not in dispute. CT
Justice Clark states: "On object