Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1868-03-14

The Supreme Co1rt Reyerses the De.
cisioR Of the Inferior Court, and Pro
aOunces fu Favor of williams.

me supreme Seurt AeNerseS me De-
cisioR Of the Inferior Court, and Pro-
aOunees in Favor Of williams.
The celebrated Williams will case
Narcissa P. Sanders rs. J. c. Williams
was decided in the Supreme Court yester-
day.
The ruling of the lower court, refusing 10
grant a peremptory sadndaaus to compel
the Judge of the County Court to grant
letters testamentary TO Col. J. c. Williams
as executor of his wife's will, upon probate
of the same 10 Philadelphia, was over
ruled.
The opinion, which is very lengthy, was
read by. Judge Milligan. Judge Harrison
having been one OF the counsel in the case
when it was before the lower court, was not
qualified to take part in the decision, and
it was, By agreement Of the parties inter
ested, placed in the hands of the two re-
maing Judges, Millgan aud Hawkins.
The decree rendered gives the petitioner,
Williams, the right of possession of the
personal property of the testairx, said to be
valued at about SIS 600
The following is the close of the decis-
ion, rendered 10 the case, which will be
interesting to those who are cognizant or
not eognizant of the previous action of the
lower conrt in this important suit:
Ii is clear, when an authenticated copy
of foreign will is presented to the County
Court, under our statute, Code, 2l84,)
that the ordering OF i; to be filed and re-
corded is not a matter OF cause. The
County Judge has something 10 do-some
legal discretion to exercise. He must de-
termine whether the paper presented is
duly authenticated according 10 the act of
Congress whether the court in which the
will purports 70 have been allowed had iu-
risdiction; whether there is any estate in
his county on which the will may operate,
and If it contains a devise of real estate;
whether, under our statute, il has been
proven before Jurisdiction according to the
laws of this State-Code, 2lS2-3-4-5; also,
Crippen rs. Dexter, Gray's r., 1908.
Ii might be- and we think il probable,
under the Code (section BAD where the
County Court has made and formally en-
tered on its records final Judgment or
decree, embracing the foregoing points, or
such others, if any, as may be lawfully
within its jurisdiction, that an appeal
would lie from such final Judgment or de-
cree to the Circuit Court. But in this case
no such final Judgment or decree appears
TO have been entered of record. The exis-
tence of the order appears only in the pc
titon and answers of the parties. 1t is said
it was afterwards actually entered name pro
tune, but the record before us does not show
the facts, consequently there was nothing
of record from which the relator could APP
peal.
Be this as it may, the order set ont, and
the pleadings and the facts contained in
the petition and admitted liz the answer,
contain every essential fact necessary to
authorize the County Court to receive, fl lie
and record the authenticated copy of the
| will presented, and to issue letters tesla
mentary thereon.
Assuming, therefore, that the County
Judge acted as a judicial tribunal, and
having found all the facts necessary to a
Judgment or decree, so that the judgment
or decree would be nothing but the concur
| sion of law upon the facts, the entering up
of the proper judgment must be regarded
as in its nature ministerial and, in the alb
sence of any other adequate specific RENE
| dy, q mdHddmus would be the proper
method of redress. Moses on Mandamus,
50-5l Reed Morse, petitioner IS; Pick.
| r., 433; Delaney Us. Dodden, II, and va
rious other authorities. Now, in this case,
without the Judgment or decree of the
court in the record, how would an appeal
lie, and if taken, what would the revising
tribunal have before it upon which TO pro-
nounce a Judgment? We apprehend, all
other questions out of the way, it could do
nothing but dismiss the appeal.
1t follows, therefore, from a review of
the whole case, that the judgment of the
| Circuit Court must be reversed, and per-
| emptory mdnddmUs ordered.
The decision pertains entirely to the
personal property and does not affect the
real estate. 1t is understood that suit
will be entered in the Chancery Court,
seeking for a new trial, bringing the ones
ton of real property again before our
| cOurts