Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-06-16
/ &c CORRECT r. Ct copy. cop J.P. cLaEE, CLERK.
Gs, and others vs.. Grnre,.

Tbs c,mpainants are the children and egaess Of william
Gee Who died year ls and filed this bill slave
Harriet property father his death, and her in
crease.
ese slaves at the fling bill. possession Of the
defendant Who year S maFr susan the
daughter William Harris and by the marriage acquired ar
and her child Houston and perhaps others OF her children
and certain other children Of Harriet were born in hs posses
William Harris In 1s47, wiI.d Harrie. aud Houston t0 his
said daughter He had purchased Harriet the lth Of Sep
tembsr ls40, Of c. Gee the executor e. William Gee BY
hill of sale follows Received Of William Harms hye hun
dred and twenty-five dollars for girl named Harriet,
aged twenty ons Wo which be sound both in
body and min and forever warrant the title Of said girl to be
slave for liz this llth Day Of September, lo4O
Itis eontesded hy the council Of Graves that c. Gee
thory to make this sale under the will Of William Gee and
William Harris upon the execution Of The bill Of sale
quired a valid title to Harriet.
ThSis denied BY the complainsns
The Clause Of the will, under which the authority Is Claimed
fOllows It will and desire, that all property,
PERSONAL he kept together, and managed and
daring EOwhOO and the maintenance and education OF
children; and in wife again she IS 70 have no
my estate but fellows toWt Will andde
she shall have and enjoy the rents profits and increase
o. tract Of land in Wilson county that PSchsSes q John
nure ny barOEhe and marc al which she IS 70 use aud an
land and property last mnon sold snd the DO
equally divided between children, with this exception that my
s5n james Gee when he comes age shaaye him bis
heirs forever one ar acres Of the said purhaei
Duke lying Wilson county to he laid Od and
When nv Youngest child shall como Of age ali my property,
PERSONAL not herein OF bequeAtd IS 20 be
dvided equay that is share and share alike among and be
tween my children. nominate and appoint brother,
joseph this last viii and Testament No
The widow Of the essAtor married. and del With
month after his death, leaving their children all infants Of
Jose6 Gee uualiaed IS executor aud took upon himself
execution or the trusts Of the will
impression entertained BY reading this record
was that Joseph Gee, Of William Gee,
that ne had failed TO execute to eOmuuate Harris,
the purchaser ans and is agreed for the eonPauSnts
latter ground alone must held wholly inopeav because il
contains indicating an Intention Z" exercise the power
bat the contrary a1pas 70 be tAs and personals
nIo the weight OF authority seems to be-
ba although it uot necessary the due execution Of
that reerd expressly referred to- yet there must
something to sbos that the PaIy lnenaea 2 e1eeps H.
5js TX parts Carweii, 3d. Andrews Emmett, Bro
y q on Benpet Is Ahen9n Yes GO9 Suisen on Powers,
M AMI this intention becomes manifest By such description
IN be ov1ySpce as shows at something party
rad not otherwise under the and the Consequence
would he wholly imperative unless applied to The power TX
dgen 80 10 9gi Bradish Gibbs John Ch, Rep. 55i
NoWis pae that und, the laws Of Tennessee since the
act Of Is7 Ch this bill OF sale be good other
fb.n by virtue OF the power in will Of William W Gee.
n power existed 81 s it is difficult Vhy this Is
not rood execution Of t. But we do to decide ibis
new t not being to the determination oi this can
and, because rs hed IN very t
principle has never been supposed TO te eonFsnoe
.Je bv exeeitor and administrators, Grod BgoW.
Con a5s lockwood sturdeva DO 393 1t is enough that
critical examination gi me VIII We thN ln
mower 70 MAKE sale. It's eaning exactly clear Bat
intend that should sell any Of his ate unless
his wife should again, In which event she was to have Ger
natural s her death, the except the leo
i.ns which vas to James, to Be sold -
his and the proceeds divided amoug his chdreu VIZ
was this property not the entire estate 70 be sold
Evidently because he contemplated that his wife might MARI
arain and alive when his rest child should hcom
~ which time, all his estate eef tchdf Is 5i5 20 ~
,rj for Ife and 20 James divided equally among ~
ehire- given t1h wife, not te 70 e divided
but await the eveIt Of her DEATH aud tR be so am
m proceeds equally divided amOng his children No property
assigned the widow ssDtrIfty, unless she narres
and Il Is ouy property TINT assigned 70 her separaey
m marriage tnat is TO be sold In TINS case no prop
v g ever gei because died, still living single,
her property separately never arose an
in like manner sale never arose. and he power
/ sell ueVsr existed a.. . a.. s.-...--,
y ss Ts 10 he kept together for the and benefit
80 10 an. the eiucation ot his children sn
o sod and at the proper time diyad among ms ehiden
Now that the widow died. single tere can H no piD'
ea or purpose the sale g Harriet and e iand' 's urn
~ - c,ntrrv se think the general intention Of the will
ins te exercise any such power Tin K -, JacAso
: W. Ver,Ien, H. John. Rep lo9- -,
- reuapinz question to The psnsation elaine
~ % Tor EeepnE aud raising slaves while in his pose
exceed the value OF Their
TO- ~, same period7 We think Hsweyer innocent
r.. he nav be- in he be VsEej IN other MT tha
ronr doer has ntermeted with the property oi con
tnants without authority without their esnent and
,o o. 10 principle that entities him 70 relief Ia suc
sVond the heirs; Afforded hin Indirectly. hy aos
i.g him rscOHps against the claim OF eOmpAnAnS @ '
0 | sx.ent.- -, - ,bs cou1
eli sn both sides Of the question: the rule seems never 70 ~
gone further than that, In the estimation Of ur
go f,r time the defsndant should have credit Tor me suPPo
and raising Of Of the slaves not II 55r,s sro
, sud for physicians bills, &c Il any, 2 "a Se SI =
4 he hires. RenEick Maceys E1 gA 5 =, 49, =
GsvFll ef als o. Land and Marsh2A hsp' ~ N"1s-
Hooper 9. Low. An. Beg. ~.