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