New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1852-03-10
Supreme Court Decisions.
MONDAY, MARCH s.


Succession Of [gace ebat Madeline Ieb1 appellant and
appellee, p. O. Hbet, administrator appellant Appeal
from Ibervile PRESTON T. delivered the opinion
Court The act of the 2Sth of March, 1874 page 90
was intended to remedy very great evil which existed
in this State previous to its passage wealthy wife
often half the Accommodations of hur estates by inter-
ess rents crops at the decease of her husband
remote collateral relations in other States countries
So husband. having by industry and economy
lated estate during marriage by the death of his wife
half of by the laws of inheritance favor of her
collateral relations however remote And not anticpa-
ting the to him. unhappy event he generally unpre-
pared for partition of his property. And yet it
wonderful with what eagerness very remote relations
peciay would seize upon the them happy event.
speedy partition by lcitation otherwise of that
which they had oled and which therefore they
could afford recklesy to deprecate by any kind of part
ton The evil was becoming great to be serious
obstacle marriages in the State and sometimes forced
men who had the apprehension of losing their wives and
with them half their fortunes to make timely removal
both from the State. 1t of the many causes
which have kept State far behind in population
and aggregate wealth. other States subsequently admitted
into the Union.
The act 1874 be interpreted by consideration
of these evils be remedied and by the well known in
tentions of the Legislature on the subject.
1t established change in law of inheritance and
the benefit of the community of acquest to the
vving partner in the community during life This was
the object be accompshed-ths remedied the evils
that existed Still out of difference to former Legsa-
ton the Legislature made exceptions favor of ascend
ants and descendants that is ascendan could deprive
the surviving spouse of the usufruct the extent of
their Inheritance. there being ascendant as in
this of one fourth of the estate the
deceased So descendants by previous marriage could
claim immediately by the death of their ancestor their
share the estate according to the of inheritance
But by second section of the act the issue of the
riage could only claim their portion OF the community
acquess the second marriage the death of the
surviving parent But exception made in favor of
collateral relations The surviving partner the comn,u-
nifty of acquests enjoys its usufrct during life to their
exclusion,
If the collateral relations in this case were the sole
heirs Of the deceased it is admitted that they could not
deprive the surviving widow OF the usufruct of the
munity acquests but they heirs of ouly three
fourths of the estate and yet it is maintained that they
can do that in being heirs of part only of the
they can deprive the widow of rights which it is admitted
they could not take they heirs of the whole estate
The Legislature intended establish rules so ncon
sstent The surviving spouse is not deprived by the act
of the usufruc of the whole community life although
deceased should children of the marriage Shall
then collateral relations take from the surviving
spouse the usuuct of the half belonging the deceased
Immediately on the death of their relation, while such
spouse could not be deprived of it during life by the
children of the deceased issue Of the marriage though
perhaps of age and in want The Legislature could not
have intended to establish laws of inheritance so unnat-
ural
reasonable Interpretation must be given the whole
The Legislature legslatng to the community
of acquest and gave the usufruct the spouse They
however, made provisions in favor OF ascendants de-
scendants These provisions do not in terms much less
in spirit nure to the benefit Of collateral relations for
the very object of the Legislature to abolish entirely
rights previously enjoyed by collateral relations.
The plain meaning then Of the whole law is that the
surviving spouse shall enjoy the usuruct the
nifty acquets during life to the exclusion of collateral
relations in all to the exclusion Of the issue of the
marriage with limitation in case of second marriage
to the wdowhood Of the surviving spouse but
exclusion of ascendants by previous marriage who still
take the decease Of their ancestor according the aw
OF inheritance to the exclusion of ascendartstha
ill., parents who forced heirs not grandparents WHO
only inherit after collateral relations Of the first degree
The judgement of the District Court is affirmed with
costs