Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1838-07-23

W
Court Of Chaneefy:
William Staples x Sarah +. his wife. aud Mpflson
| L. Porter, infant under the age OF tws1is one
years, by John Hughes, his next friend, Plaintiffs
dgains,
Samuel Davidson, Thomas Dixon, Sherlt oil
4 Campbell county. aud as such admir- dc bonIs non
! of Jeremiah Ingram deed, Robertson Cheatham
! Lewis Campbell SAMUEL Dokev, Heritage Hover
ton and Elizabeth his wife IN their right, and
| Heritage lowerted admir-. de bons non, with the
will annexed of Samuel Poner, decd, Nancy
Ingram, Legrand Porter aud Stephen Brady,
Defendants
This cansc came this day, TO be heard, on the
paI ers formerly read, the report Of commissioner
Watt made ia pursuance of the order Of The l0tl Of
! August, 1888, with exceptions thereto by The delen
danis, exhibits aud examinations OF witnesses since
I Gle6 and was argued by counsel: On consideration
whereof, the court delivered the following Opinion
= The court IS FAR from being satisfied with the
Commissioners report IN this case There can be
no doubt that tie executors in the proceedings men
] toned have managed the estate OF their testator,
Porter, decd very njudiciously. But how many
estates there managed otherwise, even by the
owners thereof, il we regard the nett balance III mo
ncy realized At the end Of each year. compared with
/ the speculative value ot negroes snd lands who
ever made profits y hiring negroes and renting lands
Not in hundred. 1t is the increase OF negroes,
and the support OF theirowne and their increasing
/ flmies, winch constitute the chief value Of an estate
| IN land and negroes Half Of the laborers in the
/ field would generally hire out for as much money as
The whole viii make after deductng The expenses of
the pabtailon and the expenses OF their master and
family. 1t not the intention Of the tesaior, nor
VIII the court indulge the PROJECT to put ms executors
to keeping boarding houses. and his widow and chIl-
dren TO board with them. This suit against the
ecutors aud the seeulliies. the latter To be paymastes,
TO cause them to account for the estate of their
taor, which came to their hands. The court wishes
TO be informed what each executor actually received,
and what lle paid away, either on account OF the
debts dueby the tesator at the me Of his death,
since his death, for the benefit OF his deysees This
should be stated with exactness if possible if not,
with probable exaetilude. Speculative profits and
probable receipts to be rejected. Probable pro-
hts and receipts are to be fesocd 10 only when exact
proof oil them cannot be referred to. The testator
died Ia November or December 1916. Two execu-
tors qualified, one only acting for several years. Ac-
cofdlng to the teslaors will, his was not to
be divided until all his debts paid. The debts
were small, and the means of payment, available in
! lol7, were more than sufficient. According TO the
wall, As the court considers, the executor who acted
did rlghtto keep the estate together during 1917 to
make crops and to account for them, aud to charge
TO the estate the expenses thereof, and the reasona-
BILE expenses of the widow aud Children (all the
deVIsecs) living together without discrimination.
Al the beginning OF 1878. he ought to have divided
the estate, having then received money sufficient TO
pay the tesators debts and also the debts contract
ed for the family in 1917 or having in his hands the
crops oil this year, sufficient, with the money receW
ed, Tor both purposes. The several and distinct ne
rests Of the widow and children require thai the
court should consider that what ought to have been
done AT the close of the year 1917 was done, to a
certain extent. Let there be account, therefore,
she"inS what The "ctng executor had received, ald
what he paid Tor the estate, or expended for the
widow and children, to the lst OF January, 1918 AZ
ter this period the family stll lived together and the
estate was kept together. making attempting TO
make profits by cropping, whereof the executor re-
ceFed the avalls, and purchased merchandise and
other necessities Tor the whole Of the devsecs as Of
one interest and has accordingly charged the same in
his account besides contracting debts which he ney-
ef pad. This is wrong. But the executor ought
not to be charged with than the crops he made
deductlng the expenses thereof, nor ought the de-
ysees to receive the merchandise and other subjects
purchased for their use and the Of their young
negroes without accounting for the value thereof
Let there, therefore, be second account, showing
the proceeds OF the crops, may be, during
the administration of the first executor and the rent
oil lands and hires OF slaves, II any, dednctug the
taxes and all expenses INQUIRE !, and divide the nett
proceeds among the several devsees according to the
/ value OF their respective lands and slaves employed.
And thirdly, let there be an account between each
devisce and the executor, in which the latter is To
be Credited only as against each, for much OF the
merchandise purchased for the family, which was
appropriated to the separate use Of each. Cash paid
on account Of meat, bread, sugar, coffee x such like
articles, being used in common must stand as gene
! raj debt against ALL first dedncting one-thrd-thc
executor aud his wife making one third of the con
sumers who should be excluded from the mess.
Charge thd OF the balance to the widow. and the
balance equally to the unmarried children. This execu
tor must be considered having appropriated to his
own use every other article purchased aforesaid,
as well as every article OF personal property proven
] nave been 50 appropriated by him. To enable the
executor 10 establish what merchandise was purchas-
ed by hun ior each OF the family, including the widow,
/ he may examine each upon oath, aid the widow as
i 10 herself and such of the children as were too
young TO be acquainted with such matters, if he
deems necessary AS TO the second executor he is
to account TO the Of his tesator for such ar
tlcles OF personal estate, other than negroes, he
received, unless IT be proved that lie appropriated
any TO his own use. lie is 10 account forlhe crops
made, &c. while the family lived together aud the
estate kept together, upon the principles LAID
down IN regard to the first executor. lie is to be
credited for any debts paid which due by the
esator, aud also for all debts contracted account
OF the estate by the first executor, and which he has
! been compelled TO pay; but the amount of these
dsDts Is TO be re-charged against the first executor
ana with hun settled upon the same principles pre-
scnoed by the court as directed for the second
statement OF accounts with the first executor For
provisions furnished the family while they lived to-
sether, aud Tor merchandise, &c. furnished, his ac
counts are to be settled upon the principles OBJ
served III relation to the first executors accounts
Ana II the plaintiffs prove that any debts paid by Ell
ttr executor were not the debls OF tie testaor at
the time OF us DEATH then, unless the executor con-
cerned Shew the consideration, TO enable the
! commissioner 10 make the discrimination directed,
the same shall not be charged agaiust the As
/ to HE rents OF Land and hires Of slaves, since the