The river in this case must be considered as the boundary of Gee's patent. It has always been thus uniformly decided in our courts.
The jury so found, and there was judgment accordingly.
Cited: Hartsfield v. Westbrook, post, 258; Cherry v. Slade, 7 N.C. 85;Hurley v. Morgan, 18 N.C. 430; Slade v. Neal, 19 N.C. 62; Shultz v.Young, 25 N.C. 387; McPhaul v. Gilchrist, 29 N.C. 173; Literary Boardv. Clark, 31 N.C. 61; Baxter v. Wilson, 95 N.C. 143; Brown v. House,118 N.C. 878; Bowen v. Gaylord, 122 N.C. 820; Rowe v. Lumber Co.,133 N.C. 437; Whitaker v. Cover, 140 N.C. 284; Boyden v. Hagaman,169 N.C. 202; Power Co. v. Savage, 170 N.C. 629.
(238)