§ 922. Rules and acts

A court may take judicial notice of a tax levied by county commissioners of the county in which the court is held on all the taxable property in the county.25

The courts take judicial notice of the rules and regulations of the general land office.26

To find a fact by presumption or inference, the inference should be a logical deduction and reasonably certain in the light of all other proper presumptions and collateral facts.27

25 School Dist. No. 32, Wilson County, v. Board of Com'rs of Wilson County, 82 Kan. 806, 109 P. 168.

26 Peters v. United States, 33 P. 1031, 2 Okl. 116; Stansbury v. Same, 37 P. 1083, 2 Okl. 151; Dempsey v. Same, 44 P. 382, 2 Okl. 151.

27 Duncan v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 108 P. 101, 82 Kan. 230. Presumption of delivery of a policy arising from possession thereof does not

One presumption cannot be based upon another.28 Facts upon which an inference may legitimately rest must be established by direct evidence, as if they were the very facts in issue.29

arise, where, on face of policy, some act remains to be done to make it complete, such as is shown by a clause "in further consideration of the sum of $- to be paid in advance." Columbian Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. Wirthle (Okl.) 176 P. 406.

A mortgage is only an incident of the debt secured, and the transfer of a note or debt secured will be presumed to have preceded the transfer of the mortgage. Local Inv. Co. v. Humes, 51 Okl. 251, 151 P. 878.

Where private property is to be taken for public use, under statutory or constitutional authority, all presumptions indulged are in favor of the owner. Watkins v. Board of Com'rs of Stephens County (Okl.) 174 P. 523.

On an issue as to whether the indebtedness of a county exceeded the federal limit, where there was no evidence of the amount of cash in the treasury or of the other available assets, which were proper credits in estimating such indebtedness, the court cannot presume that there was no cash or available assets, which would reduce such indebtedness below the federal limit. Johnson v. Board of Com'rs of Pawnee County, 56 P. 701, 7 Okl. 686.

In the absence of proof that the place where animals were killed by a train was exempt from the law prohibiting their running at large, it will be presumed that they were so prohibited. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Hardesty, 129 P. 739, 36 Okl. 682.

In suit by rightful claimant of patent to avoid decision of Land Department and charge legal title of patentee with his equitable right, brought on ground of department's mistake of law or fact, every reasonable presumption must be indulged in, in support of department's decision resulting in patent. Forster v. Ingram (Okl.) 178 P. 99.

A municipal ordinance providing for a public improvement is presumptively valid, and will not be set aside by the courts, unless it appears that the discretion imposed on the municipal authorities has been abused or arbitrarily exercised. Seminole Townsite Co. v. Town of Seminole, 130 P. 1098, 35 Okl. 554; Id., 130 P. 1100, 35 Okl. 558.

Adverse possession held provable only by clear and positive proof; every presumption being in favor of possession in subordination to the title of the true owner. Flesher v. Callahan, 122 P. 489, 32 Okl. 283.

Presumption that person will accept purely unqualified gift will be acted on as a working rule as to such conveyances. Shaffer v. Smith, 53 Okl. 352, 156 P. 1188.

Direct proof of a written conveyance which has been lost or destroyed may be aided by the presumption arising from long peaceable possession and repeated acts of ownership, though during a time less than the limitation period. Adkins v. Wright, 131 P. 686, 37 Okl. 771.

28 An instruction that it is a presumption of fact that, when a mechanical appliance fails to do the work it is intended to do, it is defective or out of repair, and that, when such appliance is once shown to be defective, it is presumed to remain so, is erroneous. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Rhoades, 68 P. 58, 64 Kan. 553.

29 Columbian Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. Wirthle (Okl.) 176 P. 406; City of Duncan v. Tidwell, 48 Okl. 382, 150 P. 112,

No liberal presumptions can be entertained for the purpose of supplying omissions, aiding deficiencies, or extending the import of the language of a portion of a record introduced in evidence. It is only when the whole of the record is introduced that liberal presumptions can be invoked to aid it.30

A presumption of ownership, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, arises from possession of personal property.31

The law presumes that a building erected upon a tract of land is a part of the land it occupies, and therefore real property, which presumption may be rebutted by showing that the building, in fact, was personal property.32

It is a presumption of law that one conveying by a general warranty deed holds the original grant. A recital in a tax deed is

presumptive evidence only, and may be contradicted.3*

§ 924. Knowledge of law

A contracting party is ordinarily presumed to know, not only the laws of the country where he dwells, but also those of the foreign country or state in which he transacts business.3

35

Where a minor's land is sold by his guardian, the purchaser and all others afterwards dealing with it are charged with notice of probate proceedings through which sale was made, and of the law in

30 Capital Bank of Topeka v. Huntoon, 11 P. 369, 35 Kan. 577.

31 United States Supply Co. v. Gillespie (Okl.) 166 P. 139; City of Sulphur v. State, 62 Okl. 312, 162 P. 744; Ragan v. Citizens' State Bank of Foraker, 38 Okl. 65, 131 P. 1093.

32 Shelton v. Jones (Okl.) 167 P. 458, L. R. A. 1918A, 830.

Articles affixed to land in fact, though only slightly, are prima facie realty. Etchen v. Ferguson, 59 Okl. 280, 159 P. 306; Bridges v. Thomas, 58 P. 955, 8 Okl. 620.

Evidence held insufficient to show that a galvanized iron portable grain bin had become "affixed to land," within Rev. Laws 1910, § 6592. Tolle v. Vandenberg, 44 Okl. 780, 146 P. 212.

33 West & Russell v. Rawden, 130 P. 1160, 33 Okl. 399.

Title to the property of a married woman is not clouded with any presumption that it was acquired by the efforts or means of her husband. Farmers' State Bank of Ada v. Keen (Okl.) 167 P. 207.

34 Miller v. Noble, 59 Okl. 29, 157 P. 740; Rev. Laws 1910, § 7416. Where the sheriff's return of service of notice of expiration of the period of redemption from tax sale shows an insufficient service, it will be presumed that the service was made as shown in such return, and the prima facie evidence furnished by the tax deed as to the regularity of all prior proceedings is overcome. Dawson v. Anderson, 38 Okl. 167, 132 P. 666.

35 Klein v. Keller, 141 P. 1117, 42 Okl. 592, Ann. Cas. 1916D, 1070.

volved, and must take notice that any deferred payments must be secured by a first lien on land sold.36

$925. Continuance of fact

37

The continuance of a fact or condition will ordinarily be presumed. Thus, the fact of insanity being established, it is presumed to continue.38 Likewise it is presumed that the influence of duress by threats continues.39

Possession being a fact continuous in its nature, when its existence is once shown, it will be presumed to continue until the contrary is proved.40

§ 926. Personal status

Contracting parties are presumed to be adults and competent, in the absence of anything shown to the contrary.1

In the absence of proof, courts will not presume that an Indian is of such a quantum of blood as to render his land subject to restriction.42 The minority of a Creek freedwoman at the time of a conveyance of allotted lands is not conclusively presumed, where the enrollment record does not show minority.43

36 American Inv. Co. v. Brewer (Okl.) 181 P. 294.

37 Where, in an action for the killing of a hog struck by a train, there is no proof that the herd law has been suspended in the county where the inJury occurred, it will be presumed to have been in effect at the time of the injury. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Higgs, 141 P. 10, 42 Okl. 171.

38 Lantis v. Davidson, 56 P. 745, 60 Kan. 389.

Under Gen. St. 1909, §§ 4844, 4845, a person adjudged insane and placed in the state hospital for the insane, and then discharged as improved, is presumed insane until it is found that he has been restored to his right mind. Johnson v. Gustafson, 152 P. 621, 96 Kan. 630.

39 Eureka Bank v. Bay, 135 P. 584, 90 Kan. 506.

40 Wails v. Farrington, 116 P. 428, 27 Okl. 754, 35 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1174.
41 McKeever v. Carter, 53 Okl. 360, 157 P. 56.

Where, in an action to reform a lease, nothing appears to the contrary, the lessor will be presumed to have been an adult at the time of making the lease. Giles v. Latimer, 137 P. 113, 40 Okl. 301.

42 Harriss v. Leeper Bros. Lumber Co. (Okl.) 176 P. 412.

The Supreme Court will not presume that a minor Indian is of such degree of Indian blood as to render his conveyance of lands inherited by him subject to Act Cong. May 27, 1908, § 9, removing certain restrictions on alienation and requiring conveyance of interest of full-blood Indian heir, to be approved by court. Moffer v. Jones (Okl.) 169 P. 652.

48 Jackson v. Lair, 48 Okl. 269, 150 P. 162; Act Cong. May 27, 1908, c. 199, 35 Stat. 312.

§ 928. Regularity in business

There is usually a presumption of good faith," authority, and regularity in the course of business and the conduct of affairs,45 and in corporate acts.46

§ 929. Mail matter

When a letter is sent by mail properly addressed, the presumption of its receipt by the party to whom it is addressed arises, and

44 Settlement by plaintiff on advice of counsel for less than the amount claimed, to the apparent detriment of himself and others, held presumed to have been made in good faith. Shawnee Fire Ins. Co. v. Cosgrove, 121 P. 48S, 86 Kan. 374, affirming judgment on rehearing 116 P. 819, 85 Kan. 296, 41 L. R. A. (N. S.) 719.

Where it was stipulated between a principal and agent that the latter should sell the former's flour at "association prices," there being no allegation in the pleadings in an action thereon that the association existed in restraint of trade or as a monopoly, nor any evidence that such contract was in restraint of trade, the presumption was that such contract was valid, and that the prices were lawfully quoted. Barteldes Seed Co. v. Border Queen Mill & Elevator Co., 101 P. 1130, 23 Okl. 675.

Where contract for the sale of oil and gas lease made approval of title by purchaser's attorney a condition precedent to its performance, the presumption was that attorney, in examining the title, acted in good faith. First Nat. Bank v. Clay (Okl.) 177 P. 115.

45 When a chattel mortgage shows on its face that it was signed in the presence of two persons, who signed the same as witnesses, as required by St. 1893, c. 51, § 23, the register of deeds should receive and record the same, and disqualification of the witnesses should be shown by the proof in the case. In the absence of proof the court will presume that said witnessing is legal, and in accordance with the requirements of the statute. Watts v. First Nat. Bank, 58 P. 782, S Oki, 645.

The fact that an adopted member of the Pottawatomie Tribe of Indians was permitted by the tribe to remove with them to a new reservation, and live there as a member of the tribe, sharing in the tribal property, will warrant the presumption that he had not previously taken advantage of treaty provisions by which he might have received patent to lands in severalty and surrendered his tribal relation, since such acts would have prevented him from going with the tribe to the new reservation. Cyr v. Walker, 116 P. 931, 29 Okl. 281, 35 L. R. A. (N. S.) 795.

An affidavit in support of a motion for a continuance, filed a few days before continuance was granted on the application of the party in whose behalf it professes to be made, will be presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have been filed by authority of such person. Stone v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co., 90 P. 251, 75 Kan. 600.

46 Without evidence to the contrary, it will be presumed that the schedules of rates and regulations in use by an intrastate carrier have been properly filed with the utilities commission. Kennedy v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 104 Kan. 129, 179 P. 314.