Orange County NcArchives Wills.....Pratt, William N November 29, 1855 ************************************************ Copyright. All rights reserved. http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm http://www.usgwarchives.net/nc/ncfiles.htm ************************************************ File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by: Ben Franklin ben.franklin.ffru@gmail.com May 2024 Source: Loose Will, NC Archives CR 073.801, Will Book Volume G, pages 521-524 Written: November 29, 1855 Recorded: Aug 1867 Testator: William N Pratt State of North Carolina Orange County I Wm N Pratt of the County of Orange & State of North Carolina, being of Sound mind & memory but considering the uncertainty of my earthly existence do make and declare this my last will and testament in manner and -- following that is to Say. First, that my executor hereinafter named Shall provide for my body a decent buriel[sic] Costing not less than one hundred dollars & pay all funeral expenses togather[sic] with my Just debts howsoever and to whomsoever Owering[? sic] out of the money that my first come into his hands. I give $500 dollars to enclose the grave yards with rocks. I gave five hundred dollars for a monument for my grave. [See Note 1] Item. My will and desire is that all the land I own in Missouri and Arkansas I give & bequeath to William P Scarlett & his Brother[s?] & Sisters Item My will & desire is that I give Caroline Barbee that is now living at Samuel Faucetts all the George Strayhorn tract of land and half of my home tract including the Dwelling house line running east & west also one negro girl named Hannah, about 10 or 12 years old. Item. My will & desire is that I gave Nancy V Pratt one half of my land where Abraham Crabtree now lives & her daughters Mary Ann now the wife of Ruffin Tapp & Martha Pratt now the wife of David Strayhorn, Caroline & Frances Pratt. I give to Caroline Pratt one negro girl named Sarah about 15 years old [page 2] I also give Frances Pratt one girl by the name of Susan I also give to Martha Pratt now the wife of David Strayhorn one negro girl by the name of Hannah. I also gave Mary A Pratt now the wife of Ruffin Tapp one negro girl ["by the" x-out] named Jane. I also gave to Nancy V Pratt my carriage & Harness. it is also my will and desire that the Amount of notes and a/c[acccounts] due me from Ilia W Nunn & wife & Children. I give unto them the afore Said notes to the amount of Same two or three hundred dollars. Its my will and desire that Lewis my Black Smith I Set him free for meritorious Services rendered for me. I give & bequeath to John Rhodes the Son of Lucinda Rhodes, the mother of the said John Rhodes all that tract of land whereon Lucinda Rhodes now lives reserving to her the Said Lucinda Rhodes a life time estate in the Same. I also give to John Rhodes the tract known as the George Rhodes tract of land. I also give to Mary Redman & to her Son James all of the tract of land whereon they now live Containing 225 acres more or less & all of the stock of Cattle, Hogs &c on the Said tract of land. It is also my will & testament that I give to Thadeus Redman the tract of land Known as the Peggy Redman tract land Containing about 110 acres more or less I also gave to the Said Thadeus Redman my tract of land Known as the John Redman tract and and[sic] the Harden Couch tract, on the Couch [page 3] tract there is a Mill, Saw Mill & Grist Mill all which I gave to Thadeus Redman, the land containing 500 Acres more or less, I also gave unto Thadeus Redman my gold watch & contents thereoff[sic] and his choice Bed & furniture with Stead &c one Cow & Calf, One Sow & pigs Horse & Bridle & Saddle. I also gave to Mary Redman one Bed Stead & furniture of her choice also to James Redman one Horse Bridle & Saddle One - & Bed Stead & furniture. I also give unto William J. Suit fifty dollars I also give Madison Wilkerson fifty dollars I also gave John R Minnis fifty dollars. I also gave Jas Brockwell fifty dollars, I also gave Robert Grisham fifty =-- I also gave Moses Turner fifty ---. In the event I do give John R Minnis $100 to Complete off the Mill if not completed by him this is null and void. I also give Mary Redman and her two boys James Redman & William Thadeus Redman. My boy James his wife Mary & her four children. I further- more leave to Wm. Thadeus Redman the Sum of two thousand dollars to be put at interest for the purpose of giving him a clasical education. It is my desire that said two thousand dollars Shall be thus expended & that he shall take his colledge[sic] Course at the University of North Carolina. The residue of my estate I leave to be Sold & the procedes to be divided between my next of Kin Share & Share alike with this exception, that Carolina Barbee Shall Share eaqually in the ["procedes" x-out] aforesaid procedes [page 4] with my next of Kin. I desire that what Store goods, that is, the merchandise at the Store Shall be Sold during the Christmas holydays by me[my] executors who are John Boroughs, Silas M Link & William Paull of Hillsborough. My new wearing appearel I give to Thadeus & James Redman, all the rest to be eaquelly divided among my negroes. Signed November 29th 1855 W. N. Pratt In presence of Dr J B Jones and Wm J Suitt In addition to the above I give to Wm Thadeus Redman my rifle gun & to James Redman my double barrell shot gun In presence of W. N. Pratt Dr J B Jones and Wm J Suitt State of North Carolina I George Laws Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for Orange County do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the last Will and testament of William N Pratt decd. taken from the record in my office In Testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand at office in Hillsborough this 5th day of March 1868 Geo. Laws CCC Clerks fee $1.50 [Will Book Volume G, page 521] State of North Carolina Orange County I Wm N Pratt of the County of Orange & State of North Carolina being of Sound mind & memory but considering the uncertainty of my earthly existence do make and declare this my last will and testament in manner and -- following that is to Say. First that my Executor hereinafter after[sic] named Shall provide for my body a decent burial costing not less than one hundred dollars & pay all funeral expenses togather[sic] with my Just debts howsoever and to whomsoever Oweing[sic] out of the money that my first come into his hands. I I[sic] give $500 dollars to enclose the grave yards with rocks. I gave five hundred dollars for a monument for my grave. Item. My will and desire is that all the land I own in Missouri and Arkansas I give & bequeath to William P Scarlett & his Brothers & Sisters Item My will & desire is that I give Caroline Barbee that is now living at Samuel Faucetts all the George Strayhorn tract of land and half of my home tract including the Dwelling house line running east & west also one negro girl named Hannah, about 10 or 12 years old. Item. My will & desire is that I gave Nancy V Pratt one half of my land whir[sic] Abraham Crabtree now lives & her daughters Mary Ann now the wife of Ruffin Tapp & Martha Pratt now the wife of David Strayhorn Caroline & Frances Pratt. I give to Caroline Pratt one negro girl named Sarah about 15 years old. I also give Frances Pratt one girl by the name of Susan. I also gave to Martha Pratt now the wife of David Strayhorn one negro girl by the name of Hannah. I also gave Mary A Pratt now the wife of Ruffin Tapp one negro girl named Jane. I also give to Nancy V Pratt my carriage & Harness. it is also my will and desire that [Will Book Volume G, page 522] the amount of notes and a/c[accounts] due me from Ilia W Nunn & wife & children. I give unto them the afore- said notes to the amount of Same two or three hundred dollars. Its my will and desire that Lewis my Blacksmith I Set him free for meritorious Services rendered for me. I give & bequeath to John Rhodes the Son of Lucindy Rhodes the mother of the Said John Rhodes all that tract of land whereon Lucindy Rhodes now lives reserving to her the Said Lucindy Rhodes a life time estate in the Same. I also give to John Rhodes the tract known as the George Rhodes tract of land. I also give to Mary Redmon & to her Son James all of the tract of land whereon they now live Containing 225 acres more or less & all of the Stock of Cattle, Hogs, &c on the Said tract of land It is also my will & testament that I give to Thadeus Redmon the tract of land Known as the Peggy Redmon tract land Containing about 110 acres more or less -- I also gave to the Said Thadeus Redmon my tract of land Known as the John Redmon tract and the Harden Couch tract on the Couch tract there is a mill, Saw Mill & Grist Mill all which I gave to Thadeus Redmon, the land containing 500 acres more or less. I also gave unto Thadeus Redmon my gold watch & contents there off and his choice Bed & furniture with Stead &c one Cow & Calf, One Sow & pigs Horse & Bridle & Saddle. I also gave to Mary Redmon one Bed Stead & furniture of her choice also to James Redmon one Horse Bridle & Saddle One - & Bed Stead & farnitire[sic]. I also give unto William J. Suitt fifty dollars I also give Madison Wilkerson fifty dollars I also gave John R Minnis fifty dollars. [Will Book Volume G, page 523] I also gave Jas Brockwell fifty dollars I also gave Robert Grisham fifty " I also gave Moses Turner fifty " in the event I do give John R Minnis $100 to complete off the mill if not completed by him this is null and void. I also give Mary Redmon and her two boys James Redman & William Thadeus Redmond[sic] my boy James his wife Mary & her four children I further more leave to Wm. Thadeus Redmand the Sum of two thousands dollar to be put at interest for the purpose of giving him a Classical education. It is my desire that said two thousand dollars Shall be thus expended & that he shall take his College Course at the University of North Carolina. The residue of my estate I leave to be Sold & the proce[e]ds to be divided betwe[e]n my next of Kin Share & Share alike with this exception, that Carolina Barbee shall Share eaqualy in the aforesaid proceeds with my next of Kin. I desire that what Store goods, that is, the merchandise at the Store Shall be Sold during the Christmass holy days by my executors, who are John Boroughs, Silas M Link & William Paull, of Hillsborough. My new wearing appearel I give to Thadeus & James Redman, all the rest to be eaquelly divided among my negroes. Signed November 29th 1855 W. N. Pratt In presence of Dr J B Jones and Wm J Suitt Jurat In addition to the above I give to Wm Thadeus Redman my rifle gun & to James Redman my double barrell shot gun In presence of W. N. Pratt Dr J B Jones and Wm J Suitt Jnt [Will Book Volume G, page 524] Orange County Court August Term 1867 The Execution of the foregoing Last Will and testament of W. N. Pratt deceased was duely Recorded in open Court See minutes Test Geo Laws CCC Additional Comments: Will Book Volume G, pages 521-524 Recorded Aug 1867 "give" / "gave" used throughout, and written distinctly. It appears that this is random. There are three handwritten copies of this will in the folder of loose wills, however the signatures reveal that none of these are the original version. Also George Laws was the scribe in both the loose will copy and the will book copy, the same misspellings persist in both versions. Note 1: From "Orange County North Carolina Cemeteries" Pratt, William N. (b. 13 Dec 1794 - d. 17 Jun 1866) Masonic Symbol and includes a fallen footstone marked "W. N. P.". Low sunken brick wall around grave, possibly a second grave within the wall. Census records show him to have had substantial assets; deed records show he was the owner of a number of parcels of land in the county. Estate Papers comprise 584 pages and are found in a folder labeled "Pratt, William N (1868)". W. J. Redmond was some eleven years of age at the date of the will and the testator lived some ten or twelve years thereafter. Testator died in 1867. There are some pre-emancipation papers in this folder. A doctor's bill from S. Vickers mentioning the names of slaves beginning 8 Apr 1862 although its value as evidence appears to be low. Some court papers extend into the 1890s. [Estate Papers - Bill of Complain by W. T. Redmond Spring 1868] North Carolina } In Equity Orange County } Spring Term 1868 To the Hon The Judge of the said Court The Bill of Complaint of W. T. Redmond & James K. Redmond of the said County & State against Jno. Burroughs Extor of the Will of William N. Pratt deceased & William Strayhorn & Wife Caroline E. (of LKP) David Strayhorn & Wife Martha J (child of L K Pratt) Ruffin R. Tapp & Wife Mary, dead leaving 3 children Isabella Alice & Wm minors Wm Freeland who is an infant of tender year without Guardian child of Frances M., wife of Johnston Freeland decd, Wm Strayhorn is his guardian all of the said County & Thomas Faucette & Wife Mildred who now residents she was a daughter of Simpson Pratt, she is dead leaving Jas & Betty her children Minors of the Said State and reside in the State of Arkansas And Caroline Barbee also a non resident and of Arkansas Humbly complaining show unto your Honor Your Complainants W. T. Redmond & James K. Redmond that William N. Pratt aforesaid decd in Said County of Orange during the year 1867 leaving a large estate in lands & personalty of which he made disposition by Will duly executed and also by Codicil duly ex ecuted - the Will being dated upon the 29th day of of[sic] November 1855 & having been proved at the August term of Orange County Court 1867 at which time the Deft. Jno Burroughs was qualified as Executor thereof & the other persons named as Executors renounced or declined to qualify: Your Orators show that as Executor the said Burroughs has possessed himself of the personal Property of said Pratt: And also of the real estate not specifically devised: has made sale of a large part thereof: between $9000 & $10,000 & retained titled thinks the bonds &c as secured and good- & that the assets they [page 2] Coming into his hands amount to some Ten Thousand Dollars or more & are more than enough to pay the debts due by the Testator & the legacies given in the Will (Correct) That by said Will a certified copy of Which is hereunto annexed & prayed to be taken as part of this Bill: the testator among other things devised & bequeathed as follows to wit "It is also my Will & testament that I give to Thaddeus Redman the tract of land Known as the Peggy Redman tract land Containing about 110 acres more or less I also gave to the Said Thaddeus Redmand my tract of land Known as the John Redmand tract & the Harden Couch tract, on the Couch tract there is a Mill (Saw Mill & Grist Mill) Deed of gift to the Hardin Couch Tract all which I give to Thadeus Redmond the land containing 500 Acres more or less. I also give unto Thadeus Redman my gold watch & contents thereof (Exr delivered it to him) & his choice bed & furniture with Stead &c one Cow & Calf, One Sow & pigs horse & Bridle & Saddle. Also to James Redman one horse bridle & saddle one bed Stead (delivered as to bed &c) & furniture I furthermore leave to William Thadeus Redmond the Sum of Two Thousand Dollars to be put at interest for the purpose of giving him a classical education. It is my desire that said Two - Thousand Dollars Shall be thus expended & that he shall take his College Course at the University of North Carolina. (Pratt sent him to neighborhood schools & also to ??? Hughes' Academy left before the first session was out & James not yet attended[?]) The residue of my estate I leave to be Sold & the proceeds to be divided between [page 3] "my next of Kin Share & Share alike with this exc- "eption, that Carolina Barbee Shall Share equally "in the aforesaid proceeds with my next of Kin" That Previously to the death of said Testator an execution issuing from the ______ Court of Burke County was levied by the Sheriff of Orange County show the John Redmand tract of Land devised as (The Levy was made on that particular land by direction of Pratt himself as they our information by H B Gutherie ????) above to your Orator William Thaddeus & that a Writ of Ven Ex having been issued upon a return of that levy, come to the hands of said Sheriff after the death of the testator, and Your Orator having been advised that it was his duty & interest to pay off the debt for which such levy had been made did so to the amt. of about One hundred & Eighty four (184) Dollars. (Land was sold & deed made her charges agree upon the sale that he should have it by paying the amt with ???) Your Orators are advised & believe that the personal es- tate & the residuary real estate of the testator was liable to such payment before the land so devised to the said William & that he after paying off the same as above has a right to be subrogated to the Claim of the Creditor upon the fund so Prima- rily liable & that this Court will enforce such rights in taking the accounts of the estate between the various legatees and devisees thereof. They also Show that a difficulty & difference has arisen between your Orator William Thaddeus & the Executor of said Estate in regard to the said Legacy given for Purposes of Education: that in 1855 when the will was written the said William Thaddeus was a boy of about eleven [page 4] years of age & that now he is at the age of about twenty four years & is a married man: that in interval he has received only a common English schooling: (see more as to his being such to Hughes, &c) that having with the consent of the testator become a soldier in the recent war, he was wounded at Gettysburg in the right arm so as to be disabled for the life from any use of the right hand as was known to the testator from the him he was wounded up to the days of his death: That your Orators are both, the regular & recognized child- ren of the said Testator although not born in Wedlock (True) Your orators show that they have demanded form the said John Burroughs the leg- acies of personal properly above mentioned: to wit the $2000 and also the horses saddles & bridles so left to them as above, but that upon some excuse of other he has utterly refused & still refuses to pay them: (no horses or saddle among the property of the deceased) that he & the defts. deny their right to the same and also refuse to account with the said William Thaddeus for the money paid by him under the execution aforesaid. To the end therefore that your Orators may be declared to be entitled to the lega- cies aforesaid & may receive them: That the estate may be marshaled for the benefit of your Orator William Thanddeus Redmond on account of his payment as aforesaid that an account of the estate may be taken & that your orators may have such other & further relief as to you Honor shall seem meet May it please your Honor to order that [page 5] Writs of subpoena issue to the saied John Burroughs Ruffin R. Tapp & wife David Strayhorn & wife William Strayhorn & wife and ______ Freeland and for as much as the said Thomas Faucette & Caroline Barbee are nonresidents that advertis- ments be made for them according to Law & your Orators will ever Pray S. F. Phillips Att. for Complts [Note: It appears that someone has interlined notations in different handwriting. These are noted here in parentheses where they occur. The lettering is very small and difficult to decipher.] [Estate Papers - Answer of Wm A Strayhorn Spring 1868] State of North Carolina } In Equity Orange County } Spring Term 1868 The Answer of Wm. A Strayhorn and wife Carolina and Wm A Strayhorn Guardian of Wm. L Freeland Minor -- and Arabella Tapp Allen & William Tapp Children of Ruffin R Tapp by their Guardi. and Father Ruffin R Tapp and Carolina Barbee now Caroline Lewis To The Bill of Complaint of Thadeus & James Redman Against These defendant reserving to themselves all rights of Complaint - for Answer thereto Saith - That it is true as stated in the Complainants Bill that the last will and testament of Wm N Pratt - direct 2000 dollars to be expended in giving the Complainant Thadeus Redmon a collegiate education. [page 2] But the Testator long before his death abandoned all hope or expectation of doing so. The Complainant Thadeus was sent to ["school" x-out] good classical school - to wit that of Mr Saml Hughes but he ?plaid?[pled/fled/played] ???? and ran away nor was the Testator able to keep him at School before the war because of his indisposition to learn or even tolerate the restraints of school It is also true as state by the Complainant Thadeus that he entered the army and was wounded after which he return to the Home and house of the Testator where he spent much of this time without any though[t] on his part or the part of his testator of going to school. The Complainant Thadeus is now a married man with two children It would be a sore affliction to send him to school - and contrary to the intention of the Testator - as shown by his conduct and acts from 1859 to his death These Defendants having answered so much of the Complainants Bill as they are advised is material - Prays to be hence dismissed with their reasonable costs & charges in this behalf sustained Josiah Turner Jr Sol for Deft [Estate Papers - Answer of Isabella Tapp, et al Mar 1868] State of North Carolina } In Equity Orange County } March Term 1868 The separate answers of Isabella Tapp, Alice Tapp and William Tapp Minor Children of Ruffin R. Tapp and Mary Tapp deceased his wife who answer by Ruffin Tapp their father and guardian - William Freeland a Minor, the child of William Johnston Freeland and Fran= ces M Freeland his wife, both now decease, who answers by William Strayhorn his guardian; and James Fau= cett and Bettie Faucett Minors, children of Mildred Faucett deceased the wife of Thomas S. Faucett, who answer by Thos. S. Faucett their father and guardian: For answer to said bill these defendant allege that Mary Tapp the mother of the said Isabella Alice and William and that said Frances M Freeland the mother of said William Freeland were the daugh= ters of Loftin K Pratt deceased, a brother of the Testator William N Pratt deceased : And that Mildred Faucett the mothers of said James & Bettie Faucett was the daughter of Simpson Pratt deceased a brother of said Testator that said L K Pratt & Simpson Pratt were both dead at the date of said will - but the said mother of these defendant were then living but died before the said testator. And then defendants claim that they now have a right to their proportional part of he residuary fund bequeath by the testator to his "next of kin", equally with the other defendant his nieces & Carolina Barbee because in law they are a part of his "next of kin". And for further answer to the allegations con= tained in the said bill these defendant refer to the answer of John Burroughs the executors Thomas Webb Solicitor [Estate Papers - Answer of Caroline Barbee Mar 1868] State of North Carolina } Orange County } In Equity March Term 1868 The separate answer of Carolina M Barbee William Strayhorn and wife Carolina E, David Strayhorn and wife Martha J. Strayhorn to the bill of complaint of William T. Redmond and James K Redmond filed against them & others to the present term of this court - These defendants for answer to said bill say that the said Caroline M Barbee is the person spe= cified and meant by the designation Caroline Barbee in the will of William N Pratt de= ceased - that Caroline E the wife of the defendant William Strayhorn is the daughter of Loftin K Pratt deceased who was a brother of said Testator and that said Martha J. Strayhorn wife of David Strayhorn is also also[sic] a daughter of said L K Pratt deceased; and they they and they only, stand in the relation to the nearest of kin to said deceased - And these defendant[s] claim that they and they only are the "next of kin" of said Pratt and are entitled to the residuary fund bequeath to his "next of kin" by his will - As to the other allegations contained in said Bill of Complaint then defendants refer to the answer of the co defendant John Burroughs executor of said Pratt as their answer Joseph Farmer Jr J W Norwood Sols ---- [Estate Papers - Answer of Caroline Barbee Mar 1868] State of North Carolina Orange County Court of Equity March Term 1868 The separate answer of John Burroughs to the Bill of Complaint of William T. Red= mond and James K. Redmond against him & others in Orange Court of Equity. This Defendant saving and reserving &c answers and says, that he admit the death of William N. Pratt, that he left the mill a copy of Which is filed with the bill, that the same has been duly admitted to probate in Orange County Court and that he has qualified as Executor, took the Estate into his possession, and has sold the lands not specifically bequeathed, and the value of the Estate will he thinks amount to $9000. or thereabout, and he supposes $2000 will cover all the debts owing by the Estate, and charges of administration But the sales of the land were made on a credit, and bonds taken for the purchase money; and the inconsiderable personal assets also consists of debts to be collected and therefore this defendant hath no assets in hand where= with to pay the plaintiff's legacies even if they are en= titled to them as set forth in their bill of complaint. Further answering this defendant alleges that he has understood and believes that said Pratt did in his lifetime make a deed pf gift to the Plaintiff William T. Redmond for the Hardin Couch tract of land, mentioned in the mill; also that the John Redmond tract which was sold under Execution and brought by said William T. substantially as set forth in the bull, was levied upon the by Sheriff by the [page 2] Express direction of said Pratt himself, an this defendant submits that inasmuch as said Pratt himself desig= nated and appointed that tract of land to pay that deft and a lien was thus formed on it in his life time, such designation cannot now be changed. Further answering this Defendant saith that said William T. Redmond has receive the watch, and bed and furniture willed to him also the cow and calf and sow and pigs, and this defendant understands that the said Pratt gave him a mare in his life time, which some of the legatees insist was in place of a horse willed to him: Also that James K. Redmond has received the bed willed; as to the horse, bridle and saddle this defendant hath no information or instruction. As to the $2000 legacy claimed in the bull for William T. Redmond, this defendant submits that the said does not take effect but is void; because its application to the sole purpose for which it was intended, and upon which it depended was impossible at the death of the testator, as the bill itself shows. The said plaintiff complains that he has received only a common English schooling. If that be the first sent him to primary schools, and then to Hughes Academy one of the most celebrated classical schools in the Country, and that the said William T. Redmond left the school before the end of the first session and could never be prevailed upon to return. [page 3] The defendant admits that said testator did recognize the plaintiffs as his own children and treated them as such in his lifetime. Further answering this defendant saith that the said Testator left surviving him nieces, and the children of deceased nieces, his nears Kindred, and he prays the instruction of the Court whether the term "next of kin" as used by the testator in the residuary clause of his will as set forth in the Plaintiffs bill embraces both of said classes[?] of his Kindred or only the first. And this defendant submits to such decree as the Court may make in the premises. And having fully answered he prays to be hence dismissed with his costs &c. Norwood & Webb March Term 1868 Solrs for Defendant [Estate Papers - Will of Lewis Pratt 24 Mar 1873] Know all whom it my con- cern that I, Lewis Pratt (Freedman) being in full possession of all my mental faculties, desire to, and do make this my last will and testament on this the Twenty-fourth day of March in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Eight hundred and seventy three It is my desire and wish to be decently buried and that my funeral Expenses be paid first out of my effects. I desire and wish all my just debts be paid out of my effects It is my wish and desire that my wife Elizabeth Pratt shall occupy the home she now has during her natural life - It is my desire and wish that my daughter Susan Pratt and my sons John Pratt & Robt Pratt shall have one dollar each It is my wish and desire that my son Lewis Jenkins shall have the lot on which I now life, at the death of my wife, He, Lewis Jenkins paying my daughter Mary Little one third of the cash valuation of the same on sd Lot [page 2] My wife Elizabeth Pratt having receive one third of the amt. the land sold to Messers Lunsford and Driver, I desire that money to be applied to her years support after my decease - In case there should be a surplus of money left after my just debts are paid, I desire that one third of the amt shall be paid to my daughter Mary Little, and the other two-third to my son Lewis Jenkins - I desire that Five Dollars be paid to M. A. Angier for the colored People Church in the town of Durham.. It is my and I do appoint my son Lewis Jenkins my Execution of this my last will and Testament to which I set my hand and affix my seal this the day and date above written his Lewis (X) Pratt mark Witness } John A McMannen } John W Wiggins } [Estate Papers - Civil Action 18 Dec 1887] North Carolina } Superior Court Orange County } Be it remembered that on the 3rd day of April 1876 Lewis Jenkins and Elizabeth Pratt sued out of the office of the Clerk of the Superior Court of Orange County a Summons in the following words Orange County == In the Superior Court Lewis Jenkins and } Elizabeth Pratt, Plaintiffs } against } Summons John Burroughs Executor of Wm N. Pratt, deceased } for A. S. Robinson and wife Caroline Robinson } Relief W. D. Latta & wife Isabella Latta and } Wm. Tapp Jr, David Strayhorn and his wife } Martha Strayhorn, W. A. Strayhorn and } his wife Carolina Strayhorn, W. C. Freeland } and W. A. Strayhorn his Guardian, George Pratt } and Alice Pratt his wife } The State of North Carolina, To the Sheriff of Orange County - Greeting: You are hereby commanded, To summon John Burroughs as Executor of W. N. Pratt, deceased, A. S. Robinson and his wife Caroline Robinson, W. D. Latta and Isabella Latta his wife and William Tapp Jr. David Strayhorn and his wife Martha Strayhorn, W. A. Strayhorn and [page 2] Caroline Strayhorn his wife, W. C. Freeland and W. A. Strayhorn his Guardian, George Pratt and Alice Pratt his wife - the defendants above named, if they be found within your County, to be and appear before the Judge of our Superior Court, at a Court to be held for the County of Orange at the Court House in Hillsborough on the eighth Monday after the first Monday of March 1867 and answer the complaint which will be deposited in the office of the Clerk of the Superior Court of said County, within ten days from the date of this summons, and let the said Defendants take notice that if they fail to answer the said Complaint within that time, the Plaintiff will apply to the Court for the relief demanded in the complaint Hereof fail not, and of this summons make due return - Given under my hand and seal of said Court, this third day of March, 1876 Geo. Laws CCrk Superior Court of Court of Orange County which said summons is returned endorsed as follows, Received 8th April 1876 Served 14th " 1876 By delivering a Copy to John Burroughs as Exr of Wm. N. Pratt, died, A. F. Robinson and wife Caroline not in my county, W. D. Latta and [page 3] wife Isabella, William Tapp, David Strayhorn and Martha his wife, W. A. Strayhorn and Carolina his wife, W. C. Freeland and W. A. Strayhorn his Guardian, George Pratt and Alice Pratt his wife. Thos H Hughes Sheriff Orange County The two copies for A. S. Robinson and Caroline Robinson his wife are returned endorsed as follows Recd 8 April 1876 Not to be found my my County Thos H Hughes, Sheriff And thereupon the following order is made and published for six weeks in the Hillsborough Recorded; a newspaper published in the County of Orange State of North Carolina } Superior Court Orange County } Spring Term 1876 Lewis Jenkins and Elizabeth Pratt Plaintiffs against John Burroughs as Executor of W. N. Pratt, deceased, A. S. Robinson and wife Caroline Robinson, W. D. Latta and wife Isabella Latta and Wm. Tapp Jr. George Pratt & wife Alice Pratt, David Strayhorn and wife Martha Strayhorn, W. A. Strayhorn and wife Caroline Strayhorn his Guardian, Defendants [page 4] Summons for Relief To the Sheriff of Orange County, Greeting: You are hereby commanded to summon John Burroughs as Executor of W. N. Pratt deceased, A. S. Robinson and wife Carolina Robinson, W. D. Latta and Isabella Latta his wife and Wm. Tapp Jr., George Pratt And Alice Pratt his wife, David Strayhorn And his wife Martha Strayhorn, W. A. Strayhorn and wife Carolina Strayhorn W. C. Freeland and W. A. Strayhorn his Guardian, the Defendants above named, if they be found within your County, to be and appear before the Judge of our Superior Court, at a Court to be held for the County of Orange at the Court House in Hillsborough on the eighth Monday after the first Monday in March, 1876, and answer the complaint which will be filed in the office of the Clerk of the Superior Court of said County, within ten days from the date of this summons and let the Defendants take notice that if they fail to answer the said Complanit[sic] within that time the Plaintiff will apply to the Court for the relief demanded in the Complaint Herein fail not and of this summons make due return Given under my hand and seal this 15th day of April 1876 - George Laws Clerk Superior Court of Orange County [page 5] In the above action it appearing from the affidavit of Plaintiffs I. That the Defendants A. S. Robinson and Carolina Robinson cannot be found, after due diligence, in this State/ II. That a cause of actions exists against the Defendants III. That said Defendants are not residents of this State. It is ordered, 1st That service of the sum- mons be made by publication in the Hillsboro Recorder once a week for at least six suc- cessive weeks. 2nd That a copy of the summons be forthwith deposited in the Post Office by the Clerk of this Court directed to A. S. Robinson Lyman, Pope County, Arkansas, and that another copy of this summons be forthwith deposited in the Post Office by said Clerk, and directed to Caroline Robinson, Lyman, Pope County, Arkansas, and said summons shall be deemed to have been served at the Expiration of the time of publication prescribed by this order. Given at Hillsborough, in the County of Orange, this 15th day of April, 1876 George Laws Clerk Superior Court [page 6] [this page of legal administrivia omitted] [page 7] The Plaintiffs Complaining Allege: I. That Lewis Pratt died in Orange County in the year A.D. 1873, leaving a last will and testament duly executed to pass both real and personal estate, which was admitted to Probate in the Probate Court of Orange County, on the 27th day June 1873 and the Plaintiff Lewis Jenkins therein named as Execution qualified as such and took upon himself the duty of executing the same that the Plaintiff Elizabeth was the wife and the Plaintiff Lewis Jenkins was the son of the said testator. II. That the said testator in his said will devised as follows "it is my wish and desire that my wife Elizabeth Pratt shall occupy the house she now has during her natural life", and also as follows, "it is my wish and desire that my son Lewis Jenkins shall have the lot on which I now live at the death of my wife, he Lewis Jenkins paying to my daughter Mary Little one third of the cash valuation of the same or said lot, my wife Elizabeth Pratt having receive one third of the amount of the land sold to Messrs Lunsford and Driver I desire that money be applied to her years support after my decease" III. That the lot whereon said testator lived at his death and which he allude to in the foregoing clauses of his will was a lot situate in the town of Durham, ion this the County of Orange, and containing two acres. [page 8] IV. That the said testator had formerly been the slave of William N. Pratt of said County of Orange and had served him faithfully so much so that in a will written by his said master in the year 1855 but which was not admitted to Probate until after his death in the year 1867, it is provided as follows "it is my will and desire that Lewis my Blacksmith I set him free for meritorious services rendered me." V. That the said testator continued to serve his former master even after emancipation and by his fidelity won his esteem and a continuance of his affection, so much so that his said master, on the third day of May 1867 executed and delivered to said testator a deed of which the following is a copy - "Know all men by these presents, that I, William N Pratt, for and in consideration of the faithful services rendered me while a slave, by Lewis Pratt (now a freedman) I do hereby give and grant unto said Lewis Pratt, freedman, one lot of land embracing the shop he now occupies and the house in which he resided and to contain two acres of land, reserving to myself possession during my life. In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and affix my seal this the third day of May 1867. Test Signed W. N. Pratt (seal) R. F. Morris J. B. Green [page 9] VI. That at the time said deed was written said William N Pratt the maker thereof was sick and a few weeks thereafter died, that he procured the deed to be written by one Morgan Glass who was inexperienced in such matters; that it was the intention of the maker of the deed to convey to the said Lewis Pratt an estate in fee simple in the land mentioned in said deed and that such were his instructions to the draughts- man of the deed who failed to make use of the necessary words of inheritance solely because of his want of experience and knowledge in drawing instruments of that character. VII. That the said Lewis Pratt took possession of said lots of land immediately after the execution of said deed and the death of his former master and continued to hold the same until hir own death, regarding himself and being universally regarded by others as the absolute owner in fee of the premises, the same being the lot mentioned in the clauses of his will hereinbefore set forth, and after his death the Plaintiffs took possession of the same, supposing that the same passed under the clause of the will of said Lewis Pratt herein before recited and they believe and so charge that such was the intent of the maker of the deed hereinbefore set forth. VIII That the said William N Pratt by his last will hereinbefore referred to, after making [page 10] many special devises and bequests, directs as follows "the residue of my estate I leav[e] to be sold and the proceeds to be divided between my next of Kin, share and share alike" and appoint John Burroughs his Executor, who caused the same to be proved in the Probate Court of Orange County, and obtained therefrom letters testamentary upon the estate of the said William N. Pratt. IX. That the said John Burroughs acting under the supposed authority contained in the said residuary clause of said will and having discovered that there were no works of inheritance in the deeds hereinbefore referred to, assume the right to sell said lot and the heirs of said W. N. Pratt claimed the right to have the proceeds thereof divided amongst themselves under the provision of the will herein before set forth, whereas the Plaintiffs are advised that it is contrary to equity and good conscience that they should thus take advantage of the ignorance and inexperience of the draughts- man of the instrument hereinbefore stated. X. That the heirs at law of the said W. N. Pratt are the defendants to this action, Except John Burroughs who in the Execution of the said William N Pratt as before stated. Wherefor[e] the Plaintiffs demand judgment 1st That the said deed from William N Pratt to Lewis Pratt be reformed by the insertion of the words of inheritance so as to make it conform to the intention of the maker and [page 11] And so as to relieve the Plaintiffs from the mistake of the draughtsman of said instrument 2nd That the defendants, the said heirs at law, be required under the order of this Court to deliver to the Plaintiffs a quitclaim deed to said lot of land. 3rd For the costs of this action -- 4th For such other and further relief as the nature of Plaintiffs case may require and to this court may seem just and right -- A. W. Graham Graham & Ruffin Atty's for Plaintiff - Lewis Jenkins one of the above Plaintiff being duly sworn says the foregoing complaint is true to his knowledge, except as to matter therein stated on information and belief and as to these he believes it to be true his Lewis (X) Jenkins mark And at Spring Term, of said Court, 1876 the Defendants ask and obtain further time to file an answer. And thereupon comes the Defendants John Burroughs Executor of W. N. Pratt deceased and by his attorneys files the following answers to wit. [page 12] State of North Carolina } Spring Term Orange Superior Court } 1876 Lewis Jenkins and } Elizabeth Pratt } against } Answer of John Burroughs John Burroughs Exr } David Strayhorn & others } John Burroughs, defendant, answering the complainant says: I. That this defendant admits the truth of Articles I, II, II, IV, V, of the Complaint II. That defendant does not know that all the statement contained in Article VI are true and cannot admit then without qualifi- cation. He remembers that Wm. N Pratt his testator was ill a considerable time before his death and believes he died on the 8th of July 1867; that Morgan Glass was not a lawyer, but was a well educated man, and a good business man, and much Experience in drawing deeds and other business contracts; this defendant does not know of his own Knowledge anything of W. N. Pratts intention as to the estate or title which he wished the said deed to convey to the Plaintiff Lewis Jenkins' father Lewis Pratt: He admits the truth of the fact that he learned from other persons after the death of W. N. Pratt that such were his intentions as to fee simple of the lot, and therefore, he acting under the advice of his [page 13] counsel abstained from selling the said property until after the death of Morgan Glass and Robert F Morris who were said to know that said Pratt had given such directions for the preparation of the deed, and that after their deaths he was advised by his counsel to sell whatever claims of title said Pratt might in law have had in said property at the time of his death in order to enable him to settle up the said estate: and that upon the sale of said lot he caused the attach written notice and declaration to be publicly read to the crows so that all persons might know what they were doing: and he begs that said paper my be taken as a part this this, his answer III. The defendant admits the possession of said lot as charged in Article VII to this extent; Lewis Pratt continued to live upon it after the said deed was made to him, but his former master said W. N. Pratt still continued to occupy & use for his own purpose the Blacksmith ship upon it until his death, and this defendant supposes it to be true that said Lewis was regarded generally as the absolute owner of the property = which at that time was considered to be of little value IV The defendant admits the truth of article VIII of the complaint V That defendant has answered article IX of the complaint in Article III of this answer [page 14] VI The defendant believe that the heirs at law are correctly set forth in article X without undertaking to say whether or not they are all interested in said property J. W. Norwood Atto. for defendant John Burroughs maketh oath after being duly sworn that the matters of fact contained in this answer of his own Knowledge are true and the rest he believes to be true. John Burroughs Sworn to before me 30th Oct 1876 Geo Laws, CSC The following is the written notice referred to in Article II of the above answer and asked to be considered as part of the answer Durham NC 17th Sept. 1873 As Executor of William N Pratt, dec'd, I I[sic] do this day offer for sale, on a credit of six months two acres of land situate in the town of Durham N.C. the same being the lot on parcel of land conveyed by said William N Pratt to Lewis Pratt (freedman) by deed bearing date 3rd May 1867 and registered in Orange County 26th July 1867, The same to be sold in four lots, each containing one half acres more or less also the tract of land adjoining the lands [page 15] of Washington Vickers and other containing about one hundred and fifty acres Known as the Dickson tract. I only sell Pratt's interest as directed by his will. I make no guarantee of title. I convey only the interest that said Pratt has. Bond & good security will be required and title secured[?] until all the purchase money is paid. John Burroughs, Executor Witness of W. N. Pratt, Dec'd. E. J. Parish Sale Crier And at the same time of said Court, to wit the Spring Term 1876, the following agreement is entered, to wit = Superior Court = Orange County Lewis Jenkins and } Elizabeth Pratt, Pltfs } against } John Burroughs as Executor of } W. N. Pratt, dec'd: A. S. Robinson & } Spring Term wife Carolina Robinson; W. D. Latta } 1876 and wife Isabella: George Pratt & } wife Alice Pratt, William Pratt Jr; } David Strayhorn and wife } Martha Strayhorn: W. A. Strayhorn } & wife Caroline Strayhorn: } W. C. Freeland and W A Strayhorn } his Guardian. Defts } [page 16] In this action the Plaintiffs submit to a non suit as to all the defendants Except as to John Burroughs as Executor of W. N. Pratt, David Strayhorn and wife Martha, W A Strayhorn and wife Carolina and A. S. Robinson and wife Carolina M (she was formerly Carolina M Barbee) and it is agreed between the Plaintiffs and these named defendants to refer all questions of law & fact of every Kind between then to John W. Norwood Esq & his award to be final between them and to be entered as a Judgment of their Court. Graham & Ruffin, Attos for Plaintiffs Norwood & Urlich, Attos for Defendants Let the reference be entered as an order of the Court Aug S Seymore J.S.C And also at said term of court the following order is made Superior Court = Orange County Lewis Jenkins And } Elizabeth Pratt } against } Spring Term / 76 John Burroughs as Executor of WNPratt } David Strayhorn & wife Martha Strayhorn } W. A. Strayhorn an wife Caroline & } S Robinson & wife Carolina M } Upon reading and filing the Consent of the parties and on motion of counsel for both parties It is ordered that this action be referred [page 17] to John W Norwood, Esq, to hear and determine at arbitration all the questions both of law and fact between the parties; and his award in writing to be entered as a judgment of this Court and to be final Aug S Seymour JSC And at the next term of said Superior Court to wit, at the Fall Term 1876, said case is continued, and at the net term of said court towit, Spring Term 1877 said cause is again continued, and at the next Term of said Court, towit, the Fall term 1877 this cause is continued - and at the next term of said Court, to wit, the Spring Term 1878, come John W Norwood, the arbitration heretofor[e] appointed and files the following award, towit, Superior Court = Orange County Lewis Jenkins and } Elizabeth Pratt, Pltffs } against } Award John Burroughs as Exr of } W. N. Pratt dec'd & others, Defs } All matters at issue, of law or fat, between the parties in the above case, having been referred to the undersigned as an arbitrator he hath had frequently interviews with the counsel of the parties on both sides, viz: [page 18] Graham and Ruffin for the Plaintiffs and T. Webb for defendants; and John Burroughs the defendant having been introduced by the plaintiffs as a witness for them, he was fully examined, and by consent on both sides his answer filed in the case was agreed to be taken as his deposition No other evidence was offered except the original deed from W. N. Pratt to Lewis Pratt, are accurate copy of which is set out in the complaint. The only question presented for decision was upon the allegation contained in the complaint "That it was the intention of the maker of the deed to convey to the said Lewis Pratt an estate in free simple in the land mentioned in the deed and that such were his instruction to the draughtsman of the deed who failed to make use of the necessary words of inheritance solely because of his want of experience and Knowl- edge in drawing instruments of that character" The arbitrator is of opinion that the testimony laid before him, does not establish the truth of that allegation and he so finds and decides that question: And upon the construction of the deed itself he is of opinion and so decides that it conveys only a life-estate in said land to Lewis Pratt, and as both the grantor, WNPratt, and the grantee, Lewis Pratt, were dead before the commencement of this action, it is immaterial whether an estate in said land for the life of one or the other of them was intended [page 19] The arbitrator therefore decides and awards that the Plaintiffs have no estate in said land, and their action may be dismissed, But as by the sudden unexpected death of two persons who were supposed to be cognizant of the true facts in the case, the real intention of W. N. Pratt may be disappointed by this necessary ware under the circumstances; each party much pay his own costs. Given under my hand and seal, this 17th day of April 1878 J. W. Norwood (seal) Arbitrator And therefore, upon the filing of said award, at the said term of said Court, to wit at the Spring Term 1878, the following Judgment is rendered, Superior Court - Orange County Lewis Jenkins } vs } No 13 William D Lunsford } Elizabeth Pratt } vs } No 14 William D Lunsford } [page 20] [this page of legal administrivia omitted] [page 21] [this page of legal administrivia omitted] [Estate Papers - Civil Action Feb 1892] NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT: #178 - Orange Co. February Term, 1892 _______________ Mary Ray (appellant) v. Commissioners of Durham County, and others, [line crossed out] Civil action removed from Durham tried at August Term, 1891 of Orange Superior Court before Winston, J. The plaintiff alleged that in 1873 one Lewis Pratt died leaving a last will and testament in which it was provided as follows: "It is my wish and desire that my wife Elizabeth Pratt Hall occupy the house she now has during her natural life. It is my wish and desire that my son Lewis Jenkins shall have the lot on which I now live at the death of my wife, he said Lewis Jenkins pay- ing my daughter Mary Little (Mary Ray, the plaintiff) one third of the cash valuation of the same or said lot". The said Lewis Jenkins was appointed Executor of said will and duly qualified as such. The object of this action is to subject the said lot to a charge to the extent of one third of its value as provided in the will. The de- fendant denies that the plaintiff has any interest in said property, pleads an estoppel by a former action and adverse Possession under color of title for over seven years. It appears that Lewis Pratt was a slave of W. N. Pratt, who in recognition of his faithful services (as is indicated by his will of 1855 by which he provided that said Lewis should be free) did on the third of May 1867 execute to him a [page 2] deed conveying the said lot, which deed is as fellows: "Know all men by these presents that, I, William N. Pratt, for and in consideration of the faithful services rendered me while a slave by Lewis Pratt (now a freedman) I do hereby give and grant unto said Lewis Pratt (freedman) one lot of land embracing the shop he now occupies and the house in which he resides and to contain two acres of land reserving to myself possession during my life. In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and affix my seal this 3rd. day of May 1867." (Signed) W. N. Pratt. It also appears that in 1873, John Burroughs as Executor of W. N. Pratt, under the authority of his will, sold the said lot at public sale, when Thomas Webb, became the purchaser, to whom a deed in fee was executed. Said executor giving notice that he made no guarantee of title and only sold the interest of W. N. Pratt, That in March 1876 the said Webb conveyed the lot in fee to said Lewis Jenkins who conveyed the same in fee to the Town of Durham; and that in 1883 said town conveyed the same in fee to the defendant, the County of Durham. It also appears that in 1878 Lewis Jenkins and Elizabeth Pratt brougbt an action against John Burroughs, executor of W. N. Pratt and the heirs at law of said Pratt, for the purpose of reforming the said deed alleging that the same was intended to convey a fee simple estate and that the words of inheritance were omitted by reason of the mis- take or ignorance of the draughtsman. The defendants in that action denied these allegations and after a reference to an arbitrator, it was formally adjudged, at Spring Term, 1878, that the plaintiffs take nothing by their suit, the award being that the allegations as to mistake were not sustained by the evidence. The complaint and answer in said suit are made a part of the replication in the present action. [page 3] The following issues were tendered by plaintiff and there be- ing no objection were submitted to the jury: Did Lewis Pratt die in 1873, seized and possessed of personal and real property, the latter as mentioned in the complaint, leaving a last will and testament dated March 24, 1873 disposing of the same, with Lewis Jerkins his executor, and which will and testament was duly admitted to probate in the Coun- ty of Orange and the said Lewis Jerkins as Executor entered upon the duties of his trust? Yes. 2. Did Lewis Pratt dispose of his property as alleged in article 2 of complaint? Yes. 3. Was Mary Little, in said will and testament mentioned, the daughter of Lewis Pratt and wife of Samuel Little, and did Samuel Little die on the 10th. of June 1887, and the said Mary Little there- after on the 8th. of November 1888 intermarry with Lewis Ray? and is said Mary the actual and bona fide devisee and legatee in said will and testament of said Lewis Pratt and that she has not received any- thing from said devise and legacy? Yes. 4. Did Elizabeth Pratt, the wife of Lewis Pratt die in March 1889? Yes. 5. Is the plaintiff Mary Ray barred by the statute of limita- tion from maintaining her said action? No. 6. What interest has plaintiff in the lot of land described in the complaint? No interest. 7. Was Lewis Pratt a slave and belonged to W. N. Pratt, and did said W. N. Pratt give to him the lot of land described in complaint? and in manner therein stated as held and occupied by him? Yes. 8. Did Thomas Webb convey to Lewis Jenkins in fee simple said lot of land as described in complaint, by deed dated March 9, 1976 and before suit was brought by Lewis Jenkins and Elisabeth Pratt against [page 4] John Burroughs Executor and others at Spring Term, April 1878? Yes. His Honor rendered judgment in favor of the defendants and the plaintiffs appealed. Shepherd, L. As the plaintiff claims Under the will of Lewis Pratt it is necessary to determine what estate the said Lewis had in the land which is the subject of this action. It is insisted that he was the owner in fee simple because the jury found in response to a part of one of the issues that W. N. Pratt "gave him the land described in the complaint and in (the) man- ner therein stated as held and occupied by him." Turning to the complaint we find nothing which discloses the source of the alleged title; but assuming that the issue intended to refer to the replica- tion we are unable to perceive anything in that pleading which con- fers any title upon the said Lewis, except the deed executed to him in 1887 by W. N. Pratt, the owner in fee of the property. From 1855 up to the execution of the above mentioned deed, the said Lewis, it appears, was occupying the property by the permission of the owner W. N. Pratt: and even had he been occupying it adversely and was ca- pable of holding it, there being no color of title, and the period of his entire possession up to his death, being less than twenty years - no presumption of ownership could have arisen. It is clear therefore that the only title which the said Lewis had acquired [x-out] was conferred by the deed executed by W. N. Pratt in 1887, and we must now inquire whether that deed was [page 5] efficient to convey more than an estate for life. There being a total absence of words of inheritance, it is too plain for discussion, that at law, the deed conveyed but an estate for life, and there being no evidence that words of inheritance were omitted by mistake, it must follow that the deed cannot be corrected, unless upon an inspection of its contents the court should, in the exercise of its equitable [x-out] power, [xout] decree that it be reformed under the prin- ciple declared in Vickers vs. Leigh, 104 N. C. 248. In that ease the language of the deed was quite different from the one now under consideration. There, from the peculiar provisions, which were fully discussed in the opinion of the Court, it was plainly manifest that the grantor could have had no other intention than to convey an es- tate in fee. The same is true of the cases of Sanders vs. Sanders, 108 N. C. 327 and Moore vs. Quince, 109 N. C. In the former, the sale was by virtue of a power under a will, and it will be seen from the context of the deed that the evident purpose was to convey all of the estate of the testator; besides, the word "heirs" was used in the warranty. In the latter case, the conveyance was to the trustee and the executors and administrators, and the purposes of the trust required that the trustee should take an estate in fee. Quite dif- ferent is the case before us. Here, there are no words of inheritance and there is nothing whatever to indicate a purpose to convey the fee, except the simple reservation of the possession for the life time of the grantor. This, while affording a very strong inference that a fee was intended, is nevertheless entirely consistent with a purpose to convey an estate for, life, the possession of the grantee being postponed until the death of the grantor. In the cases above cited, the terms of the deed were clearly inconsistent with an inten- [page 6] tion to convey only an estate for life, and this it world seem is the principle upon which those decisions are founded. We are very sure that it does not extend to a case like ours, And in this we [two-line x-out] are not only sustained by the older decisions, but also by the recent case of Anderson vs. Logan, 105 N. C. 266 in which the habendum was as follows: "To have and to hold all of our interest in the above mentioned lot from ourselves, our heirs and all that may claim under us and our assigns forever". There was no pleading alleging any ground for equitable relief, but the Court strongly intimated that had there been such pleading, in lan- guage used would not bring the case within the principle declared in Vickers vs, Leigh, supra. To hold that such a deed as the one be- fore us warrants the court in decreeing its correction by a simple inspection of its contents, would certainly be going far beyond any of our previous decisions, and we are not prepared to extend the doc- trine beyond the limits of actual precedent. This would seem to put an end to the case, but the counsel for the plaintiff very earnestly insists that because Lewis Jenkins, the executor of Lewis Pratt, about three years after the death of his testator, purchased the land for himself of one Thomas Webb (who had about three years previously purchased the reversion of the executor of W. N. Pratt) the said Lewis Jenkins, being executor, must have held the same as a constructive trustee and according to the terms of the will. It is not easy to understand, in the absence of any evi- dence to show a mistake in the deed and where its terms are such that the court will not upon its face decree its reformation, how the said Lewis Jenkins could in any sense be a trustee. The estate of the [page 7] testator in the said property ceased upon his death, and no trust as to the same could have devolved upon his executor. Conceding however that he was a constructive trustee, so that the purchase of an out- standing title would have enured to tho benefit of his cestui que trust, and that there was some latent equity (such as the right to have the deed reformed), [--------------large x-out -------------] [ ---- large x-out ----] how is it possible that the defendant, a bona fide purchaser of the legal title, could have been affected there- with unless it were shown that it purchased with notice. There is no evidence of notice here. Plainly the suit to reform the deed was no notice, as the executor of W. N. Pratt had conveyed to Webb before it was instituted. Neither was the possession of Lewis Jenkins who purchased of Webb, constructive notice, as his possession was consistent with his legal title, and there is no evidence of any .ac- tual notice to the town of Durham, nor to its purchaser the County of Durham. There was then no constructive notice by possession of any one claiming against the legal title, and there was none by reason of the suit, for by a decree therein it had been adjudged that the deed conveyed but A life estate; and lastly, there is [x-out] an utter absence of evidence to show any equity existing in the plaintiff or any one else, even if there had been actual notion of any claim. Assuming then as we have done that the plaintiff was not estopped by the former suit, she not being a party thereto, we are of the opinion for the reasons given that she cannot recover. We commend the zeal of counsel in his efforts to establish the rights of his client, but if these have been lost by reason of the death of witnesses or other ad- ventitious circumstances we do not see how we can grant any relief es- pecially as against the defendant which for aught that appears in a bona fide purchaser without notice. AFFIRMED [Estate Papers - Issues Aug 1891] North Carolina, } Superior Court Orange County, } Aug Term, 1891 Mary Ray } against } Issues Lewis Jenkins, Exr } & Commrs of Durham Co- } Did Lewis Pratt die in 1873, seized and possess of personal and real property, the latter as mentioned in Complaint leaving a last Will and testament dated March 24, 1873 disposing of the same, with Lewis Jenkins, his Executor; and which Will and Testament was duly ad- mitted to probate in the County of Orange, and the said Lewis Jenkins as Executor entered upon the duties of his trust? Yes- Did said Lewis Pratt dispose of his property as alleged in Article 1 of Complaint ? Yes- Was Mary Little in said Will and Testament mentioned the daughter of Lewis Pratt and wife of Sam Little and did said Sam Little die the 10th day of June 1887, and the said Mary [page 2] Little thereafter on the 8th day of November 1888 inter-marry with Lewis Ray? and Is said Mary the actual and bona fide devisee and legatee in said Will and Testament of said Lewis Pratt and that she has not received any- thing from said devise and legacy Yes Did Elizabeth Pratt the wife of Lewis Pratt, deceased, die in March, 1889? Yes Is the plaintiff. Mary Ray, barred by the Status of Limitation from maintaining her said action? No What interest has pltf in the lot of land described in her complaint? No Interest Was Lewis Pratt a slave and belonged to Wm. N Pratt, and did said Wm. N Pratt give to him the lot of land described in the complaint and in manner therein stated as held and oc- cupied by him Yes [page 3] Did Thomas Webb convey to Lewis Jenkins in fee simple said lot of land as des- scribed in Complaint of plaintiff by Deed dated March 8, 1876 and before suit was brought by said Lewis Jenkins and Elizabeth Pratt against John Burroughs Executor & other at Spring Term April 1876? Yes Submitted by the Plaintiff as the Issues in this action James B. Mason Atty for Plaintiff