The national Republican., 1867-02-07


The plaintiff insists that upon his birth the es-
tate which his mother inherited from his deceased
halfsister the child Of WoloottJ was 'shifted'
from his mothers grantee TO himself by force Of the
rule stated By Blackstone, q Black, 2os.l Heirs
presumptiye are such who, II the ancestor should
die, Immediately would, In the present circum.
stances OF things be his heirs; but whose right OF
Inheritance may be defeated by the contingency Of
some nearer neir being born, as q brother or
nephew, whose presumptive succession may be de-
stroyed BY the birth Of child or daughter, whose
present hopes may hereafter be cut of by the birth
Of son. Nay, even II the estate hath descended
by the death Of the owner 10 such brother, or
nephew, or daughter In the former cases. the estate
shall be diyested and taken away by the birth Of q
posthumous child and In the latter II shall also be
totally divested BY the birth Of a posthumous
SON."
The judgment below lin the circuit for the north.
ern district Of Ilinos) for the defendant sus.
tanning tho statute Of the State against the doc
trine Of Shifting inheritance, stated above. The
plaintiff thereupon appealed to this court, relying
upon that doctrinei and he maintains that tho
English common law Is still In force In this country
as to descents whenever there has been no erpyeis
change In that regard, and especially In the State
Of illinois, which State upon It's organisation for
maly adopted the common law and acts Of the
British Parliament In aid thereof, which were Of
general nature, and not local 10 England a. rules
Of decision until repealed. The rights Of the plain
tiff accrued under this act and the introduction Of
the additional restrictive words $50 far as the same
s applicable" into tho act Of 1S45, under which
defendant claims, must not DO permitted to shape
or qualify the former act.
Tho defendant submits that posthumous children
were enabled by the act Of 1S45 to inherit their
fathers estate the same as II they had been born
In his lfetime that the rule Of desoents estab-
shed BY that law seems to be complete and just In
all Its parts and as Il makes no provision for
II does not proper to invoke the aid Of an al
most forgotten feudal rule, TO defeat the manifest
purposes Of the Legislature. Many cases arc cited
to show that the descent and heirsbp Of real estate
is exclusively governed by the law Of the country
within which Il Is actually situate rs laid down In
story's Conflict Of Laws, (sec. 4s3)
Q. BeckNith for plaintiff In error. Z. W. Fuller
and H. +. Mather for defendant in error.
CRIMINAL CoURT-Judge Ffsher-The
case Of Sanford Conover was resumed. Hon Jas.
7. Wilson, member Of Congress from Iowa. was
sworn, and testified that the prisoner was before
the Judiciary Committee last May. The usual
oath was administered to Conover. At tho tme
Conorer's testimony was taken, Campbell was not
present, nor was Roberts. During the examina-
tion, however, Campbell came In, and Conover was
present ht said examination.
CrosS.sxaminsd: Was present during Conover's
examination. The question to whether there
was any arrangement between the witness and
Judge Advocate General Holt for the presence Of
the prisoner or Campbell was objected to by the
Mr.: Smith, stenographsr Of the House, was re-
called.
Mr.. Lander objected to receiving the written 70.
ports Of the reporter purportins to be the evidence
taken before the Judiciary Committee
The District Attorney argued that they were
proper evidence, and should be received as such.
In answer to question by the counsel for the
prisoner, the witness stated he was now satisfied
that the written testimony Of Conoyer before the
committee was not submitted TO him for revision.
A nrolongad dar0 nj nm hnth sid folI al
gardlng the relevancy Of the testimony taken be-
fore the committee.
Tho witness identified the paper numbered 49,"
as the report Of the second examination Of tho
prisoner. Could state the main points Of the OF.
animation. The report was written by himself and
was accurate.
The witness was then called upon to read the
paper, after II had been inspected by the counsel
for defence, which he did He afterwards read the
testimony Of Campbell.
Cross.examined-Mr. Gooding, for defence, called
upon the witness to answer certain questions rela-
tive to the written report Of Conovers examination
In order to test his memsry without the aid of the
report. Numerous questions were asked, few Of
which the witness could not answer positively.
At the request of the prisoner subp9nas wero or
dered to be issued for Hon. A. j. Rogers, Of New
Jersey and Mr. Williams, Of Pennsylvania, to ap-
pear before the court.
Jos. A. Hoaro was next called to the stand. Had
known the prisoner at the bar since January 1865.
The written statement Of Judge Holt relative to
the completely Of JEFF Davis In the plot to assas-
sinate Abraham Lincoln was submitted 10 him by
the Judiciary Committee. A paper handed
the witness by the counsel for the Government and
recognized as his deposition taken in the presence
Of Judge Holt.
Mr.. GOOdng said the indictment stated that tho
deposition was taken before Judge Holt, who has
no right to administer m oath. He argued that
1t was no deposition and could not be offered as
evidence In the case, since 1t did not answer tho
count In the indictment.
The District Attorney pronounced the document
tissue of falsehoods prepared by the perjurer now
on trial. That was its proper name, whatever the
counsel for the prisoner might term II, and argued
in favor of Its admssibility as evidence.
Mr., Lander followed, eloquently protesting
against It's admissiblity on the same grounds as
those taken by his colleague, viz: the incompetency
Of the Judge Advocate General to take deposition
Such deposition was not taken before Judge Holt,
but before q notary public. Judge Holt might have
been present, but that did not alter the case In q
legal point Of view. In q legal point Of view tho
deposition taken. not before Judge Advocate
General Holt but before q notary public.
Lengthy arguments, pro and con-, followed, and
the court adjourned to meet tomorrow at the usual
hour.