Brown v. Brown.

Haix., Judge. If wc were informed by the records of the County Court of Wilkes that the nuncupative will of James Brown had been proved in Court, and we should *351 be furnished with a copy of it properly authenticated, I think we would be bound by it j but in the present instance it seems that the County Court has admitted to record two affidavits which fall far short of establishing a nuncupative will. It is true the record speaks of them as a nuncupative will, but that does not make them one. I think we cannot view them as such, although they have been directed to be recorded, and that the petitioner has a right to recover. It does not appear that James Brown specially required cither of the witnesses to bear witness to what lie was saying $ the words he uttered were drawn from him by the person whose interest it is to establish them as a will. My opinion is that the petitioner should ■ have a decree. Per Curiam. — Judgment for the petitioner.