Gregory v. Richards

• Decision Date: 31 August 1861
• Citation: 53 N.C. 410,8 Jones 410
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: SANFORD B. GREGORY v. WILLIAM RICHARDS.

8 Jones (NC) 410

53 N.C. 410

SANFORD B. GREGORY

v.WILLIAM RICHARDS.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August Term, 1861.

Possession of a stolen article, raises a presumption of theft by the possessor, only in case such possession is so recent after the theft, as to show that the possessor could not well have come by it otherwise than by stealing it.

It is not proper in a court to base instructions on a hypothesis, not sustained by the record or the Judge's case sent up.

THIS was an action of SLANDER, tried before DICK, J., at the Spring Term, 1861, of Lincoln Superior Court.

The writ was issued on 23rd February, 1857.

The declaration sets forth that the defendant accused the plaintiff with stealing his bridle. Pleas--general issue, statute of limitations and justification.

The plaintiff proved that he was a man of good character, and that the defendant, on the 19th of February, 1857, said of and to the plaintiff, “you stole my bridle, and I can prove it,” also that he, the plaintiff, stole his (defendant's) bridle, and he could prove it.

The defendant introduced a witness by the name of Huffman, who stated that defendant, in 1854, was engaged in working on the plank-road, near Brevard's iron works, and had procured from Mr. Brevard a stable, where he kept his horses and bridles; that in the month of December, 1854, Mr. Brevard made a public sale of a part of his personal property, which continued for several days, and that a number of persons attended the sale, and the plaintiff amongst the others; that the plaintiff had a one horse-wagon with some articles for sale; that on Tuesday morning of the sale, a sorrel horse was found in the stable of defendant, above mentioned, which the defendant locked up; that on the night of that day, the staple of the stable door was drawn and the horse removed; that the defendant's bridle was left in the cutting room of the stable on the evening of the night when the stable was broken open, and that the same was missing on the next morning, and that he never saw it again until he found it in the possession of the plaintiff at Dallas, at April Court, 1855, on the same sorrel horse that had been locked up in defendant's stable; that the defendant demanded the bridle of the plaintiff, who said that he had got a negro at Brevard's to put up his horse, and that when it was brought out by the negro, this bridle was on it; that he had tried at the sale to get his own bridle, but could not do so, and he said further, that on his, (witness',) stating that the bridle in question, was the property of the defendant, the plaintiff gave it up to him. The witness further stated, that the plaintiff and defendant were very unfriendly at the time of the sale aforesaid, and continued so up to the time then present.

The plaintiff proved by one Dellinger, that he saw the plaintiff at Brevard's sale, with an old blind bridle in his hand, saying that he had lost his own bridle, and had got that in its place; that he had got a negro to put up his horse, who had brought it out with this bridle on it; that plaintiff enquired for Brevard's overseer, and on being informed where he was, went off in the direction indicated.

He also proved by one Cloninger, that witness heard a conversation between plaintiff and defendant about the bridle, in which the former stated, that he had his horse put up at Brevard's sale, and that a negro had brought it out with the bridle in question on it; to which the defendant replied, “you or the negro stole the bridle, and I don't know which is the worse, you or the negro.”...