Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-04-19

Richard Hancock died 10 Cannon county Ism
18Th July, 1850. leaving widow and thee childie
the compltna,I, Ala nta, anu the dsfeud
ants THIS bill l. filed for the settlement Of the Is
tate aud set a-iIe division Of me slaves an
other property made b. the inisstlle. aad the par
ties, a day or Two before his death The slaves er
fifteen in number, and all. together with other
Rven to the children before the last division, In
descendants Of .'Ceiie.
The fret question which arises ia the case is a
to the title to her-Whetlether Riehsrd lI4acocI
had an estate for The life OF his wife only with r.
msinder TO her children, the entire estate. Til
question is only importsnt now, las the ehildrel
have received the slaves, aod had q division o
theT) on question Of advancement. Ga the mar
rsge Of AlRDsinta TO 0wsn, two Of ths oldest Of Ce
las children we're placed in their hands as gift
as they say, AID they have iserease3 COTS lsrably
ard In the last division they accauated for them a
their present value, upoE the idea that they oaly
got the life estate and thai they subject thu
reminder interest OF all the children, when. il
they got the absouie estate by the gift, they would
Oely be liable 10 their value at he da'e
of tee gift, as an advancement This WoGl4 m IKE
Very greet difference ia the amount of their
haies OF the fifteen SLAVES. The Complaints al,
lege that they were mistaken to the rights WheH
they went into The recent division, and accounted
| for the present value u tie slaves advanced TO
Them, and s,gned The wiring in relation thereto
They charge the defendants misei them by
s,sing that they had submitted llwy ers he clause
OF she Will under which the lille orginsled, and
had legal advice 70 the effect stated upon it that
they new informed that The true const, NC ion
excludes any remainder ia The children, but gives
the absolute estate 20 their mother, 70 which the
marital right vi their fshe attached. This STATE
ment shows that the first sep towards the ADJUST
ment OF The rights Of the parties is TO place u con-
sruston upon The sixth clause Of the will Of Jacob
| Adams, made in North Cal olIna. in the year 1907
| 1t reads: " S,Tihly l give 10 my dsGghIer. Mary
/ CoODRr. Il m Or OIL e her.
time, and If she saould de without say heirs born
Of her body the said Iegro girl aud her increase
! return to my estate, ant equally divided amCng the
rest Of my children"
Here is disposition CT the slave TO his daughter
for life and ex press disposition except in
eye1t-,bat sne should die without "heirs S0rn
Of her BODY which, in that connection, clearly
means children, aud in that event TO 90 his, the
the fsststor's other children This contingency
did not happen, for she died in 1858 leaving three
cnldren-the complainant A'amiUta, and defend
ants IL cannot then re;urc TO his estate, and the
question is where does it 90, when the event upon
which it vas 10 go over underline will became impus
sibls? The position o: defendants is, that esta
by impli:afioH-the remainder, vested IN the
children Of tie tenant Tor If. II that be so, the
controversy is ended, the division now i'm
psached vas made upon that construction. This
construction j., say the least Of it, plausible
and the question is One upon which sound legal
minds might differ, as it SENS they did, ia mis-
S:se.
An estate by implication only be sustained
The principle Of carrying the testst0r's Intention
into effect. Tina. rule may ne Illustrated by exam
plies like these, devise over after the death Of
ihs wife, the arrival at age of c5i.d, wi,hou:
expressly giving hem any estate, would confer by
necessary implication, estate for life, or dor
ing minority la these the estt,e Is disposed Of in
a manner indiea:e unerIiagly, that The use was
to be 10 per- ons named until the happening OF q
certain eSent-thrre was Contingency But
here there is DO reference TO the heirs children
with vieS u give hen aGy dIsliEct tslEte, but
only 10 specify al uBcertaiu even, ny Ehich tha
rights Of others were 10 be governed Thai il, il
children were bJru Cf Inc GaGgdter, iheu tSe
bounty sh iaId not * 10 ,tra1gsrs 70 his blood,
but his other children, but If she should
have chIiIIer, then the reason Of limiting the es~
Ia 10 her .irr NJ logger existed; AMI IS m4k 70
osPOsIijn of IN ibat event, be &c irly linen led
that Ter estate th3ud be absolute aud un.ipited
aud tue proper subject to al tbs ordinary rules
applicable 20 the eIsOns estate OF married women
with reference 10 the martial rights Of husbands
and TIE laws Of distribution. To avoid these con-
quences, AM secure benefits to property TO call
dren by way of what is Familiarity called toe entail
ment of properly, there must be something tangi.
bic, and explicit that persons dealing with itmay
not be entrapped.
In the will of Armstsad Moore there was 4 clase
very similar 10 this which We construed St last
term, 5 Sneed 49, as We now Do this.
Perhaps the ony difference is that there the es-
tate given was general dependent upon the coHtin-
geney of dying without heirs to the boiy ami here
il was for 1" life " 10 terms. Can this make any /
difference in the construction We think rot: anI
so are the authorities. 2 Bro. Oh. X. AIS; Pew
ell on Dew. 602; y Law Lib. 32l. This Is contrary
to some Of the old cases. but is now we'll settled /
So The life expressly given enlarged into
a fee upon the birth of q CHILD. 50, our opUijn IS
that the Chancellor right in holding that upon /
the marriage of Richard Hancock 10 1872 with the I
widow, Mary Cooper, and the birth Of children, be |
became absolute owner of the slave Celia aud her |
increase, and could dispose Of them by advancement
or otherwise as be chose. Aud it must follow that /
a gift to the compliments after they married I'M
explained would be advancement, and only 10 be |
accounted for by them in the distribution Of the
tate, otter his dscth It their value when advanced.
Such was the decres OF the Chancellor with he me- 4
oessary accounts upor that basis. To reach these i
results it necessary make void and set aside
a division Of the property made by the parties at
the instance of the father day or two before his
death and bond signed by them all at tina. tims.
in which the slave given to complanants had been
accounted Tor by them at their then increased /
value.
This raises the next and most difficult quasti n.
1t seems that on the marriage of cOmplaiasn 5
some twenty-five or thirty years before, Jenny, a
child f,CellA, with her child Nina placed n
their hands by Rich lrd Hancock, and were by them
retained and claimed as their own down to this d.
vision. That they bad increased TO seyeGj that four
Of them had been sold and the other three still ~.
tanned A short time before The death CT the oil
man. difficulty seems to have sprung up among the
children to their khts in relation The decend-
an Of Celis-wbeth they entitled in remain
der st the death of their mother in 1853 uader the
will Of their father befJre set forth aud Cstrued
il which event the eampl9inants wOuli be bound to
return or account for those held CT disposed Of by
them at their value a. the eEd Of the life estate n
if there was remainder, then their lille By gift
was good as an advarcemenf, aud they would only
be bound to Secount for the value AZ the time re-
ceiyei, which is proved 10 have bsen only 6vs or
six hundred dclars,
Their father very anxious 10 have ,he matter |
settled before he died aod that there shou'd be no
contentious smjng bis children after his death
Steps were taken bring the parties together at bis
house Two or three days before his death to settle
he matter. 1t appears from the proof that the oil
nan was not exactly certain as 10 the nature of his
lille lie mot generally acted and talked in rela
ion to these slaves. aa If they were his own abso
utely, both before aud since the death Of his wife
md at other times said they we're his only for the
fe Of his wife, and after that belonged to his chI
lren Her conversations were 10 the same effect
Ind such seems to have been the case among the
children And il was question about which tley
night honestly differ, and upon which their opin-
ons would be ap tot, and did fuctuate
Four CT five of the Beghbori were requested ts
attend on the day designated, and make a Division
If Gil the slaves descended from Cells, ineluding
hose that eomplsinants had sold, and still held
The referees refused until the parties greed
IN principe on whICh it was to be done The
~ 4 -, Al -