The weekly Panola star. [volume] (Panola, Miss.) 1857-1881, 1867-01-12
TfMH Ma IHIf fIsfna
Iltelsla8a NJ lhe illHh leHH VI
FfFufA AHa tppeHis

fwW" ~ HiHNliiH ~ w ~ WNf
Raffl H. IleRIfia
fhe oplaion n iha emf ess NJ
ilyeftd W. thief insiitp Handy
This was = pili.m fled ~ ihe No
tellee, M Wiflnw N lfwis VI Jla.
Fils, deceased, In Tho MadiAn pm
bale Court aTaiasi We appellants, Ne
heirs and representatives n the dc-
eeassd ~ ihe allotment N dewef IN
several lfacta n land In That counts,
n which II Il alleged that The ~
eraaed wm seired and Ir,ascsscd
during the yeefarc, and which Ne
bad conveyed n some NJ the appel.
la6is not In Rood faith IN 4 valuable
consideration, bat IN violation N her
marital rights, and In which she had
not rclinquI-led her dover
IN The case ~ II u nov presented
fof our determination, u Is not insist.
ed In behalf Of the appellants, that
the convcyanees 10 the appellants are
sufficient 10 law 10 bar The rights of
the widow In the lands embraced In
the deeds 10 them, set forth In the
pleadings and evidence, except that
to the appellant David u. Jiggitts
as to which, II is insisted, that the
righsof dover is barred. The answer
OF David T.. Jiggitts, who is son Of
the deceased, denies that the convey
ance 10 him was not made in good
faith and for a valuable consideration,
and sets up that deed as bar to the
dover claimed in the land embraced
in il. On final hearing the court
decreed that the widow was entitled
to dover in all the lands mentioned
in her petition, including the tract
conveyed to David +. lights.
The first and main question pre-
sented for our consideration is, wheth-
or that decree as to David f. Jiggitts
is correct.
In support of the claim of this
party, he offered in evidence n deed
to him executed by the deceased,
bearing date lst January, 1861, the
consideration Of which is stated on
its face to be "the sum of eight
thousand five hundred dollars-fvc
thousand for love and affection, and
three thousand FIVE hundred dollars
the receipt of which was thereby
acknowledged" and conveying ia
David +. Jiggitts a tract of land in
Yazoo county, in fee--also deed
executed by the son to his father, the
deceased, bearing date 9Th June
1868, stating a consideration of thir.
teen thousand dollars, and conveying
to the father the tract Of land men.
toned in the above deed, and another
tract in Yazoo county, purchased by
David +. Jiggitts from one Wallac,
also the deed from Wallace t.
David +. Jiggits tor the last men
toned tract, the consideration o
which appears on its face to be foul
thousand five hundred dollars-als,
a deed from the deceased to Davi,
L. Jiggitts, bearing date Sth June
1868, stating on its face a considera
ton Of thirteen thousand dollars, an,
conveying TO David T.. Jiggits in fec
a tract of land in Madison county
designated in the evidence as tn
Almanse Place, being a part Of tn
lands claimed in the petition as bein
subject to dover. David +. Jiggitt
testified, as witness, that the con
sideration given to the last mentione
deed was the land bought by hir
from Wallace, above mentioned
about two hundred acres, and tn
land which his father gave him i
1861, being the land embraced !
the deed dated lst January, 1856
above mentioned. That the witne,
exchanged these two last mentione
tracts with his father for the AL.
manse Place, and that this was Il
consideration of the two deeds b,
tween them above mentioned, date
Sth June, 1863, aud that the witne
took possession of the Alaman
Place at the time. He further stat,
that he did not record the deed fro
himself to his father because Of d
trouble in the country. Ii appear
by an inspection of this deed, that
the time il was offered in evidence
had not been acknowledged
proved and recorded.
1t appears by the record that I
these deeds were made during 1
covcrture of the petitioner and h
husband, and that they separated
a state of alienated affection in Oct
Der, 1861, and continued to Ii
apart thereafter until his dea
in February, 1866.
The question, then, is whether
these facts, the deed from the
ceased to David +. Jiggitts, dat
June 8, 1868, Is to be considered
made in good faith and for valual
consideration, as to the rights of |
widow; for II il he wanting in eitl
Of these particulars il cannot oper
to defeat the right of dover In
widow. Let US first examine
point of the consideration.
In the first place the deceased ms
deed Of gid, for such il appears
be by the acknowledgment Of Da'
L. Jiggitts, in his testimony, o
tract of land in Yazoo county, wo
eight thousand FIVE hundred doll
to David +. Jiggitts, on the lst
January 1861. In that tract
ought that appears, the widow
Ter clearly entitled to dover; for Il
It's conveyed by deed Of gift, and wi
gia out valuable consideration. Hav
gia thus acquired title TO that Ia
M David L. Jiggitts conveyed the sal
at together with another small trac
bic much less value, to bis father,
.