The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1866-02-07


Mr.. Manly, bill to allow persons OF In
dian blood to bear testimony in controversies
at lawand equity. Placed on the calendar
Mr. Palmer, bill for the reilef OF Hiram
Hunter, former sheriff of Madison County
Referred to the committee on the Judlclaly. |
ON CALENDAR.
On motion of Mr. Mckay, o bill to amend
the charter of the town of Greenvllie, was
taken up. The bill passed its second ana
third readings under q suspension q Inc
rules. a.
hill to amend the 18th section OF the
II 9Th chapter Of the Revised Code was put on
its I'd reading. Provides that widows ols-
senting from their husbands will, may take
of his personal estate as in cases OF lntes7
tacy. ,f tho
bill. Saw no good reason for changing the
existing law-especially as the aiteratlon
nroposed would operate to the pre]udlce OF
children by giving the widow an UNDUE pro-
portion of the personal estate ~ ~
Mr.. Manly said that the gentleman IRON
Harnett had Inexperienced the scope ana
object of the bill. The existing law, IN cases
of infestacy, gave to the widow where
there was but one child, one half OF the per-
sonal estate, but in cases OF dissent from
W. khere there is but one child, the law al
lows her but one third of the personality
He saw no good reason OF making dstlnc-
tion between the two cases to the widows
prejudice.
Mr.. Hoke opposed the change contempla-
ted in the bill. The provision allowing the
wife but one third of the personally, where
the dissent from the will, was in his opinion,
lust and reasonable. Some respect was due
to the husband. s5 $500
Mr.. Smith, of Hartford, thought that as
long as the law. allowed widows to dissent
from her husbands will-full legal effect
should be given to such dissent by creating
an intestacy as to her. He hoped that the
bill would not pass.
Mr.. jenkins, of Warren, was not only In
favor of the bill, but where the husband dies
intestate, if the property came by the wife,
| he was in favor of giving her the whole of it.
Mr.. Moore, of Martin, thought that when
| the widow dissents from the will, such dis
sent should have The effect of creating vir-
! tual intestacy as to her. He was in favor of
the passage of the bill as reported.
| Mr.. Cameron said the effect of the bill was
| to give the wife one half of the personally in
cases of intestacy, instead of one third where
there is but one child No change was con-.
templated where there is more than one
child. 1t was eminently proper that this
| change should be made. He concurred with
the gentleman from Martin, and was in favor
of giving the widow the whole of the per-
sonalty where there were no children, and if
he were the Caliph of Bagdad such decree
should issue Immediately.
Mr.. Mckay again addressed the House, in
opposition to the bill. He thought it would
encourage dissents from wills and consequent
litigation, prejudicial alike to the widow
! and the children, as the costs would speedily
| absorb the personally in question. The wo-
men were a dissenting class any way, and the
tendency of the bill would be to foster the
spirit of dissent, and fill the courthouse with
cdceats.
Mr.. Hoke, asked leave after hearing the
discussion, to take the " back track" He
had thought at first that the bill would work
injury to orphans. If it applied only to ca
ses where there was but one child, he should
withdraw his objection and accord his sup
port.
The bill passed its second and third read
ings under a suspension of the rules.
Resolutions were received from the Senate
concerning the status of the present session
| OF the Oeneral Assembly. 1Hcst tuuouy
the views of the minority of the joint COM
mite raised on this subject. They declare
the session of the General Assembly, which
began on the 9th November, 1865, and en-
ded by adjournment ONE SESSION. They
provide that this session close by adjourn
ment today February 3rd, 1856, to meet
again on the 5th of February, 1866, and
further for continuing over and resuming at
the next session business pending in either
House at the time of adjournment
| Mr.. Manly moved to amend the resolutions
by substituting the majority report, namely,
resolution declaring that the adjournment
and re-assembling of the Legislature consti-
tute but one session: 6s55i,..i III
Mr. Hoke moved to amend the amendment
by substituting the following:
''Resolced, That the session of the Legis-
lature called by the Governor to meet on the
18th of January, is an ertra session of the
Legislature, and shall be considered to end
on the third day of February, 1866"
These conflicting propositions elected a
protracted discussion, in which Messrs. Smith,
4 of Hartford, Hoke Dargan, Manly, Phillips
and Others participated. "a,
Pending a vote the House took recess
until o'clock, P. NJ IN tA
EVENING SESSION.