The weekly Panola star. [volume] (Panola, Miss.) 1857-1881, 1867-01-05


nflr n ~ iHaia fHaft HfH
mnleHna h fasi Haasf 81 ss
nD htFff q mHg AfmlHaf shw
hn iINhsfFa, fnd eaaliI aaf lhsfs
ffa frplY ~ fhe sfi
Ith the #fl'ioa aad mhd II lhis
efW wnfpff ~ ~ hls aei ~ admin
lsifalof lho eiliiaH eimmahafs IL
ihew twla "fmn petitioner fsf
ierUn fvf fdminisifHif ~ iae
am y lleHien8n, dttasei uawti
fully shows A. fhe hnd IN hke
iunnnef fefiifa thfi, leHefam isva.
administrator N lawson II Ilentlef
en- decreased and l.a aeeufl.es aff
heli and firmly l#mndH &c. md
bdl tho petition and iHhd afe ianed
"jcncfs0n ibye" Iiis official ahmr
ncicr Y sufficiently stated III the buiy
of bpili Instruments, and clearly IN
lieaics lii intcniIUn ~ spenk aud
bind himself IN hn representative
character II has lWcn too ofien and
TOO lohg settled llmt q public officer
whose character a. aucli u stated IN
the body Of The certificate. 1f other
instrument executed by him. In hh
official capacity, need not do more
than append his name, IN require
reasoning or citation Of authority on
that subject.
But II Is said that he had been dis
charged from his trust before the
execution Of these instruments, and
could not, therefore, further act in
his character Of administrator, and
that the bond Is for this reason void.
1t appears in the record, that by
an arrangement between The hus.
bands of the distributes of the
estate of Lawson +. Henderson, de-
ceased, and the administrator, Love,
the Probate Court discharged him
from further accountability to that
Court. This was done without no.
tico to the distributes. The record
shows no citation ever issued but it
recites that at appearing to the court
that A. B. Treadwcll and his wife
Margaret Q. Treadwell, and Joseph
II. Postcll and his wife Ann T.. c.
Postcll, having been duly notified,
&C., and that NJ. q. TrcadweIl and
Ann +. G. Postell are the only heirs
at law and distributes Of the estate
of lawson Il. Henderson, deceased
and their waiver of citation having
been filed endorsed on said account
and their consent to its addition and
allowance" &c. This waiver of ci.
tation and consent, as appears by th,
record, is signed by Postell ant
Trcadwell for their wives respective
ly, and this is evidently the evidcnc,
upon which is based the recital il
the record that the distributes ha,
been "duly notified" as there is n,
citation returned executed appearing
in the record.
The question then arises, whethe
this was q waiver of notice by thes'
/ distributes, or whether their hus
bands in the abscna of any evidenc
of authority, could waive for then
the notice required by the statute
upon the application Of the admins
traitor to surrender his trust.-Codc
= p. 439, art. 81.
Upon this point we think il clear
1 that the husband has no such right
under our law. lie is not the gen
eral agent of the wife, in relation +
e her separate estate. Atwood VS.. Mer
c edith ct al, 37th Miss, 635, 64l
And to allow the husband, thus
bind the wife, and conclude her b
= the judgments of the Probate q
: other courts, would defeat the whol
a policy of the law, in reference to til
{ separate property Of married womei
c This was, therefore, judgment {
: decree Of the Probate court, withoI
the notice required by the statui
d above cited, and this court has ofte
$ held, in reference to this, and a
$ other courts, upon general principle
# that their judgments are void
against all parties interested therei
It who for want Of notice, have bee
d excluded from their day in court.
: In the case of Neal VS.. Wello
Is 18th S. d NJ, 649, il was held that
'e final settlement and discharge of /
'f administrator, without giving d
notice required by the statute,
Ct void.-Ncylands ct al. VS.. Burge
le al, 14th S. d NJ. 20l, is to the san
OF point. In the subsequent case
4 Winborn VS.. King ct al, this cou
e, says: "a final settlement, to be co
to elusive upon the parties interested
as the estate, and to have the effect
be discharging an administrator, C
at only be made upon notice such as t
n, statute requires, and the record mt
I'd show the notice. But the proceedi
BY is not void for all purposes. Ii h
n, such force and effect as the law gi'
OF TO exparte settlements, or as they
If usually called, annual settlement
They are valid to this extent, becat
w the law requires no notice in the Ct
Id Of annual returns or settlemen
OF made by an administrator; all p
he ties in interest having the right to
a heard in relation to them, after !
ch ticc, when final settlement Is propo'
irt to be made.
rit The account filed as a final accot
nd Is then to be regarded as an ann
ler account Of the administrator, 10
its fled al the November term, Is
en- and il follows from article 81, Co
he p. i39 that the administrator, 10
'en was not discharged by the deere,
January, 1861. The article provi
RS, that "evcry executor or adminisi
hat tor who may be removed or surr
is der his trust shall continue TO
. l. "a = ~ A