Doe Ex Dem . Colvord v. . Monroe

63 N.C. 288

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: January 5, 1869
• Status: Published

Opinion

Reade, J.

I. There is nothing in the Constitution or laws of North Carolina, which forbids Cherokee Indians residents from taking and holding land. There is, therefore, no force' in the defendant’s first exception to his Honor’s ruling.

II. The statute requires that all contracts with Cherokee ' Indians, involving ten dollars in value, shall be in writing, and subscribed by two witnesses. The deed offered in evidence had the names of two subscribing witnesses, as the statute requires, but upon the probate for registration, only one of them was examined. When a will of lands, which requires two subscribing witness, is. admitted to probate upon the testimony of one, it will be intended, prima fade, that it was legally proved by him. University v. Blount, N. C. T. R. 13. Harven v. Springs, 10 Ire. 180. His honor committed no error in his charge upon this point.

III. The fact that one of the subscribing witnesses denied his signature, did not of itself render the deed void, and notwithstanding his denial, it was competent to prove by other evidence that he did subscribe it. 1 Blackstone’s R. 865.

Pee Cueiam. There is no error.