
    WILEY PASLEY v. ALLEN RICHARDSON AND WIFE.
    
      Action to Recover Land — Evidence—Payment of Taxes— Tax Lists.
    
    Where, in the trial of an action of ejectment, the defendant, for the purpose of showing- the character of his own possession and in rebuttal of plaintiff’s title, offered in evidence the tax lists for a large number of consecutive years to show that the land in dispute had been listed for taxation by him and those under whom he claimed, and that plaintiff did not list the land during any of said years ; Held, that such evidence was competent and that its weight was for the jury.
    Civil ACTION, for the recovery of land, tried before Nor-wood, J., and a jury, at March Term, 1896, of AlleghaNY Superior Court. There was verdict for the plaintiff, and from the judgment thereon defendant appealed. The facts appear in the opinion of Chief Justice Faibcloth.
    
      Messrs. R. A. Paughton and W. 0. Fields, for defendants (appellants).
    No counsel contra.
    
   EAiboloth, C. J. :

This was an action of ejectment. Each party introduced evidence of title. Defendants proposed to introduce the tax lists of Alleghany county for the year 1874 and all following years to show that Samuel Pasley, under whom defendants claimed title, listed the land in dispute, and that plaintiff did not list said land for taxes during any of said years. This was offered to rebut plaintiff’s title, and to show the character of defendants’ and Samuel Pasley’s possession. Plaintiff objected to this evidence. Objection sustained and defendants excepted. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff and defendants appealed.

In this ruling of his Honor there was error. The evidence was competent and its weight was for the jury. Austin v. King, 97 N. C., 339; 1 Greenleaf Ev., Sec. 493. New trial.

New Trial.  