Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-05-21
OFFICIAI..
Opinions of the Supreme Court of the state
of Tennessee, at Nashville, December
Term, 1888.
Ell. Gardenhire vs. Kinds.

Il.
In hscause it clear thai the claim set up by the defend
at nds that he his wife, Margaret, acgured title 70 the
slaves Mea and Betsey BY the statute OF limitations
these obtained possession Of these slaves from Adam Gar
denr her father And il manifest from reading Of this
| the Ijth Of April 1875.
her poom and hat Of her hGssand we're 10 suborln I
Garlenhires tile The d-ei proved registered
Hzed valid and afterwards d IN slaves under it The
Of Gillian ct ais Spence Hum l6o direct author
The then these slaves their increase NUT be
decided alone upon the deed Of the 18th Of April S What
the rights Of The children Of Margaret Hnds and her hus
band, the defendant under that de-d3
That she estate for her and separate use, ard that
he had and could have interest right this property,
during ;he coverturc, cannot he controyerted
The conveyance made the doEor- 20 E. L. Gtrieulre,
his that be shouI hf the above described negro
girls slaves aforesaid, and tie increase Of the said girls The
and separate Use and fet Of the said Margaret HH
daughter OF him. the sd Adam Gaenhre and shall suffer the
Margaret Kinds and her heirs forever to enjoy the possession
and profits OF tie above named girls AMI their inefee to her
and their and sole and separate and benefit forever
This Language undoubtedly gave her separate estate and
eued the marital nights Of the defendant during the coyerue
Clancy on Rights, 1928.
But died leaving children leaving her surv
and the real contest is between the children and him Can
they he allowed 10 take, under this deed and
his marital rights OF only dng the coyerture, but
after his wife DEATH that as husband he cannot be permitted
to acquire this property, but its ownership must devoiTe
them as her blood relations and next Of kin
This question has much Of difficulty in it. But when
consider the eLtie instrument and take into consideration the
the deed made and to which suppose proper look
Zones Jones Dew Ed Rep 7 the opinion to which
fEian husband not only during the marriage but after his
daughters death.
done But this intention may exist and be shown not only in
deed or will made y another Ianneo vs. Laird 10 Aerg -
necessary order to exclude him. that should SHOW bis vile
had only life estate in the property He may he excluded
where she has the entire estate 10 Yer 22 Swan 80 Judge
settler as TO the marital rgb Of The husband for II ,fntert
lie exclude him altogether matter Of whether
the wife took the entire estate only life estate"
The language Of this deed striking ans peculiar The tus
shall suer the sSid Margaret Kinds and her heirs orev
to enjoy the possession profits Of the above named girls and
their increase t. her and TIER and sole ard separate
and 6eaet JoreUer lie evidently here looked period be-
yOnd Margaret Kinds DEATH ard that the trustee should hold this
property for class OF persons whom The donor designated as her
heirs that is her next Of kin, blood relations That this
the actual meaning Of the donor Individually we have
doubt And this Interpretation may he given iBsru
ike this, in order exclude the marital RICH Of the hus
band shown by Ware ais Sharpe Swan 49, and Sug
Tyson, Hawks Rep. Az
to distinguish these in prime pie, from
That husband or next wife,
has been repeatedly settled Hawks Rep AZ swan 4S9
The appointment Of trustee though not conclusive is cir
cu9stauce not 10 D. overlooked lSWan rs hha 4o'.
We also Of opinion that to the property devised and
bequeahe to L. Gardenhre in trust for Margaret binds AID
her heirs in the sixth clause Of Adam Gardenhes viii, the
marital rights OF the defen aut must the authorities,
the clear The Words she and her heirs
permitted enjoy the profits and emolu
Of the said land, and the prodts and increase Ct the last
Aforesaid negrce5 forever authority TO have this
eject, and useless to consider other expressions and words
In Fywel Hope. SIS, Hsrlweke held that
promise in writing y the intended husband to his Intended WIFE
that should enjoy and the Issues and profits Of
mOey of the estate then in the possession Of her mother after
deeease OF her MOTHER, gave the wife estate her sep
lie said the note could bear other construction,
although the separate use be found
should She the and profits, il they
TIE property the husband the next moment And he
added that the word enjoy strong to imply separate
. Atk. SIS. Clancy Rights 2t3
looking this will the light Of the circumstances
der which made, constrained to come to the cnu
sion that the estato intended to exclude the defendant marital
rights altogether favor Of the heirs: the blood relations and
Of Kin Of Margaret Kinds. Swan $50 Hawks R. az;
lie had gone of and had been gone for years; had in effect au
wife and children when the will made They
lived with the teator and been supported by him Tor years. the
being impOvden and nolven. The children Of the
testaors and fra in health and there
fore dependent 1t was questionable whether defendant
disposed aid he and 50 disposed, whether he could he Of
his daughter and her children he had little condolences
the defendant How natural then that he should provide for
he INTENDED the defendant to have this estate alter his
wfes death
his son, complainant, whom he had fall confidence
for bis iatfr Marzare and her heirs and eur tat
he shall see she they enjoy The rent
profits eOluents Of the said land and the profits and
crease Of the last Aforesaid negros forever"
regard this language veil as the whole scope
DEVISE restraint Of the marital rht' It is purely
question Of intention permitted in it,
to look at the common meaning the The husband
neither Of kin to his We he not the de
scrpon used, heirs IF tie rife for though in determining the
a y Of an estate heirs would be a word
Of expansion limitation and the force allowed it,
words executors and administrators had been used yet in
irving the intent the Court will consider the meaning
word heir thought be technical word and here it
not used technically because it applied to sHGy shall e
blood relations, whom the Law casts the inherit
the death the ancestor, and the with next o.
kin.
These principles and the result to which have arrived WILL
think be found sustained 10 the in Iawk Swan
which have already referred That have reached the
Of Adam Garenshre have doubt TIN
maintained whenever it can be and au0
ty Furthermore Of opinion that the trust estate OF
painau terminate with the death CT Margaret Hnds but
that the exigenCes Of required and such
Gareushirs, that should he extended after bis
dea;l soas to prote this estate for her children
deed it is provided that he shzll the said Mar
gaTet Kinds her heirs forever to enjoy the possession and
P oIs to her and their oln sole and separate use and heneht
freyer The might be daughters in which the
donor continued separate estate, and for this purpyse the
trust is still necessary
And in the will provision is has she and her hee
70 he permitted enjoy the rents and profits and emouments Of
the land, and the predis and increase Of the negroes
This Language implies the eonuuanee Of the trust estate i