The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1876-08-24
LOlIAIl IN. ALTERS.

LOCAL. MATTERS. Il
THE CONGRESSIONAL CoNrEHT1oN-CAU-
Gus OF RICHMOND DELEGATEs.-The dele
gates to the Third District Congressional
Convention will assemble ut the Exchange
Hotel to-day at u O'Clock. Mt which hour the
Convention will be called to order.
The;city delegates are requested to meet
at the hotel at 103 o'clock this morning for
consultation.
A RICHMOND CASE DECIDED BY THE
UNITED STATES SUPREME CoURT.-The
United States Supreme Court on Monday de-
cided the case of Annie Knots, Carrie
Knots, Edwin Knots, infants, &C., appel
lants, Us. Franklin Stearns, executor, &C.,
on appeal from the Circuit Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia. This suit was
Ebrought to set aside sale and conveyance
OF certain read estate situated in Richmond,
Of which one Edwin Knots died sieZed,
made in 1865, under a decree Of the Circuit
Court Of this city, and to compel the deliv-
cry Of the property to the possession Of the
plaintiffs. The decree for the sale was
obtained upon bill filed for that
purpose by the guardian OF the in
FAINT children Of the deceased, to which
his widow was made party. The
property sold consisted OF house and
lot, which, with few articles of household
furniture, constituted the entire estate of
the deceased. The house was at the time
much out Of repair-so much SO that in its
then condition it could not be rented, and
neither the widow nor the children had any,
means to repair it. Nor had they any other
| estate to which they could look as source
Of support. The widow was entitled to
dover in the property, and it was incapable
of partition according to the respective
rights of the parties. Itwas therefore man.
ifestly for the interest Of all OF them that
the property should be sold, and the pro-
ceeds converted into fund which would
give them some income. The Circuit Court
of Richmond was invested with jurisdiction
under such circumstances, upon proper
showing Of the facts, to decree sale OF the
estate Of the children. A law Of the State
expressly conferred the jurisdiction and
authorized its exercise upon bill filed by
the guardian for that purpose, il it was
clearly shown, independently of admissions
in the answer, that the interest OF the infants
would be promoted by the sale and the
Court was satisfied that the rights OF others
would not be violated by the proceeding.
[Code Of Virginia OF 1860, chapter 1881
| The widow consented to the decree so far
as her interests were concerned, and it is
only with reference to the estate Of the chill
dren that any inquiry into the validity OF
the sale can now be had. The greater part
Of the papers and entries in the suit in the
Circuit Court of Richmond was destroyed by
the fire which occurred on the Sd OF April,
1865, the day on which the city was occupied
by the army Of the United States; but their
absence was in great degree supplied by
the testimony OF the counsel OF the guar
dian, under whose advice the suit was
brought and conducted. The testimony and
copies of the DEGREES preserved show that
the proceedings were regularly taken in ac-
cordance with the provisions OF the statute
and the practice Of the court. The bill was
filed by the general guardian, and the widow
and children were made parties defendant ;
they all appeared to the suit, the children
by special guardian ad Item, appointed
by the court. a reference was had to a
commissioner to ascertain the facts required
by the statute to authorize sale; his re-
port showed the condition of the prop
erty, and that the interest Of all parties
would be promoted by its sale, and that nc
rights of any other person would be violated
thereby. The report was accepted and ap-
proved, and decree for the sale was &C.
| cordingly made, which was entered on the
| 18th of March, 1863. The sale under it was
had on the 5th of April following, when the
testator OF the defendant Stearns became
the purchaser for the sum Of S13,S00 cash
The sale was approved and deed OF the
property ordered and executed to the pur'
chaser. The widow gave birth to post
humous child in May following the
death OF her husband, and the validity OF
| the decree is assailed because this un.
born child was not made party nor its in
terests specifically considered in the pre-
yious proceedings in the suit. The decree,
after ordering sale Of the property, also
provided for the investment Of the proceeds
| in bonds or stock of the Confederate States,
or Of any State belonging to the Con1edera-
cy, or of the city Of Richmond. The pro-
ceeds were invested in bonds Of the Con.
iederacy, and the investment was approved
by the court. 1t is now contended that the
decree of sale was invalid because of the
direction for the investment OF the pro-
ceeds, and the subsequent approval OF the
investment made, the counsel Of the ap-
pelants insisting that aid was thus directly
given to the rebellion. 1t is held that
| the posthumous child did not possess,
until born, any estate in the real property
of which the father died seized, which
would affect the power OF the court to con-
vert the property into personal fund if
the interest of the children therein being or
the enjoyment of the dover right OF the
widow required the conversion. Any estate
devolyed upon it at birth was in the pro-
perty in its then condition. On the second
point it is said that the purchaser under the
decree had no concern with the investment
| OF the proceeds. His title is not affected,
however unwise or illegal the disposition OF
the money. Affirmed. Mr.. Justice Field
delivered the opinion.
NEW DEP0T.-The Chesapeake and Ohio