Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1861-05-21
Alber. C. Fraaklin, ct ais Vi. John Arpasld, ct ais

Albert G. Frs1kln, ct ais Vs. John ArDheli, ct ais
This case is sgain before the Court for the pur-
pose Of adjusting the equities Of the parties, which
have grown out Of the will Of Isaac Franklin, de-
ceased the decisions Of the Courts made upea 1t,
| and the execution Of the will.
The disruption Of the scheme Of the will by the de-
cision of the Supreme Court of Louisiana, declaring
that all devises of immovable properly, situated IN
that State to the charity held TO be valid BY this
Court, are void; and the execution OF the VII! upon
| its own scheme for number OF years. have made
/ the questions embarrassing.
The Court is, however, much aided by the able
report Of R. ]. Meigs Esq, made under its former
decree. 1t is unquestionsbly true, thai the Charity
created by the testator in his WILL can take no BEN
eft whatever from the immovsble property situate
in the State Of Louisians, neither directly By way
of the gift nor indirectly the principle of mar
| shaliug assets.
| By the law Of Louisiana, the testGtor was com
| petent to dispose Of enc third Of his immovesble
| property situate in that State to any lawful
purpose, or to impose it lawful burdens at his
| discretion.
The gift of this one-third to the Charity WIS an
| unlawful purpose, and was therefore void.
By the will the tesator subjects the whole of his
| immoveabe property in Louisiana to the payment,
By its renues income of certain specified objects,
viz: debts, smeorstop, legacies and expenditures,
/ which have no connection with charity and are
lawful This disposal; exceeding the quantum that
/
| is reducbe to that 'quantum." La. Code, article
1885, the charge the revenues Of the dIsposable
portion of his inmovesble property in Louisians IS
| Q valid one.
The burden Of praying the pecuniary legacies in
the 7th item Of the will is imposed exclusively on
1 the revenues Of this immovesble property.
The will charges these revenues with the payment
| Of his debts and all other expenditures contem-
plated bylhis will and also charges the income of
the property given to the charity with the payment
| Of the same debts aud expenditures, with this ex-
ceptiou that the widow should have the benefit Of
| the Fairyue property during her widowhood. Un-
Ill these burdens should be removed by the revenues
| ef the immozesble property and the income of the
property devised 10 the charity, the property de-
vised to the charity was to remain in the hands Of
his executors and be under their control, and the
income applied to said burdens. With this excec-
tion thst Fairvue property, during the time Of the
| widow'a usufruct thereof, should pay nothing to
| wards said burdens
able property to the payment Of said burdens dur
ing the same time, and contempiates the possibility
that the tims might extend beyond the majority or
marriage Of his unborn children,
| Tie trustees Of the charity are not entitled to
the possession OF the corpus Of the property deVIs
ed tothsm, until these purposes are sccompl1shea'
and the disposahls portion OF said immoVeanle
properly s liable to contribute its entire revenues
during tha same time-noi in aid or 70 reieass tHe
charitable bequest, upon any equitable prineiPis,
| but by force Of the testamentary disposluOn'
There il no charge in the viii upon the corpS1 ~: "a
the teststors property to meet the burdens Ol nis
viii. Bat On principles u seoity ''a"''''k 'A'