Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1876-10-27

From committee on Judiciary against Il .
-, relating to the conveyance Ci real estate
by husband to wife.
Mr.. Wales. Of Burlington. who intro
duced tho bill, favored it, passage on the
ground that 1t was an innocent bill and
ought to be passed. lie said any man can
now convey his property to his v III. through
third person and such deed Is regarded a.
valid. only as against the creditors of the
grantor. We may a. well allow a man To
deed directly u his wife. and hold such
executed with all the eolemuities Of
law. e. valid, a. 20 recognize only the
deeds made through the intervention #
trustees H thifd party. There axe
cases where a man has attempted to de-
fraud second wife OF her just rights By
deciding hi~ property directly to other par
ties ami there j. Do more danger fraud
under the provisions of this ban than under
the present law The objection 10 II arises
from the old ard absurd idea that the hus-
band and wife are enc 10 all matters in the
eye OF the law and ought not to be allowed
u convey property 20 one another. Chi
dren have no rights IN the iither'> estate
until alter ms death and 50 there can be NJ
fraud upon the chi dren 10 permitting the
man - decd bis property directly - his
wife for her support and protection ile
was in favor # the bull
Mr. French, Of Woodstock. aid it was
always well enough % let well enough
alone. lie never knew 0t any abuses 10
grow out Of the present law. and the plea
OF those who favor rhiS law, that 1t requires
two deed e. be mad. was no valid reason
tor the passage Of TIE bill Take the case
OF an oii man who Ea, 4 young and schcm-
ing wife who Will u-e undue hlence over
her husband ana get possession Of property
TO which >be l. not entitled ami t. which
Others have a better right Let there be
the intervention of third person, and in
most cases such fraudulent conveyance viii
be prevented.
Mr.. Wales. OF Burlington. said that in
case We rCquire two decis 10 be made. they
are almost always duplicates, witnessed by
the same persons. drawn at the same time.
by the same lawyer AMI executed with the
same sOlemniiy. Why not permit the en-
to be reached by directly deciding the pro-
perty from husband to wile. The objection
raistd-that this IS an Innovati0n-is Of no
weight lie wOald prt-r on the first
Iuesday of November next to vote directly
for Nj. Hayes but We are prevented BY
provision requiring the in-
terventlOn collectors he would do away
with the electors. and vote directly for Pres
ident. lie would make progress in this |
matter. as well, and permit a man to do di- !
rectly what there Is no objection - his doing |
by the Intervention OF a third person.
On the question of the third reading of /
the bill Mr.. " ales. OF Burlington. demand |
I'd the yeas and hayes, which were taken /
Aye, 50 Nlys. no, 50 the third reading Of 4
the bill was IT fused.
From committee on judiciary, against II.
% IN amendment ,i section Is chapter 81.
?. : relating To jurisdiction Of Justices #
he peace third reading fused
From committee on grand list, in favor OF
u. Al, to legalizs the grand lists , f the town
II Bloomfield, for years 1874. 1873 and 1876
bird reading ordered.
From committee on grand list in favor of
4. l0l, to legalize the grand lists of the
own oil Stowe. Tor the years 1874 and 1875.
hId reading ordered.
From committee on banks. in favor of fl
05, to incorporate the Bennington
Ounty Savings Bank; with proposals Of
mendment; which We're agreed to the
MI was then read third time and passed.
Mr.. Olms,ead. of TOwnshend, called m
]. Is, TO extend the benefits ,f common
chools laid on the table yesterday by his
notion. Mr.. Olmstead then offered a sub
titute bill. which was read the first and
econd times. and together with the origin
i bill. IT ierred to the committee on educa-
ion.