Shenandoah herald. [volume] (Woodstock, Va.) 1865-1974, 1877-05-23

tater to his daughter, Isabella Hughes
He then directs that the residue of
his estate shall be equally divided be-
tween bis six children, viz: Lucinda
Warden, Ann Lenew, VIM. Vannort
Cyrus Vannort, Isabella Hughes, and
Eliza Boone, cor their heirs" the
tes;ator expressly declaring that "his
daughters or their children were to
be the recipients of the legacies given
to them by the will.
The testator further provides that
if any of his children should be dis
posed to purchase any or all of his
servants, they should have the priv
lege of doing so.-No provisions is
made by the testator for the payment
of his debts, either because he owed
none, or because he knew that the
law deyolved that duty upon his ex
ecutor.
The law makes it the duty OF a
personal representative to proceed
with all proper diligence to discharge
all the duties which it imposes upon
him, and among these is that Of col
lec:ing the assets, paying the funeral
expenses, expenses Of administration,
and the debts against estate in the
order prescribed by law; and then Of
distributing the residue according to
the provisions of the will, when the
decedent has left a will, In this
case the executor proceeded to col-
lect, within few weeks after his
qualification, considerable number
Of the bonds and debts due the estate,
amounting to the sum Of $3677 10,
and leaving at the end Of the year,
after deducting disbursements, a
balance OF 1891 .49.-The money re-
ceiyed by the executor, according TO
the testimony, was Southern bank
notes, which. with Confederate States
Treasury notes, constituted almost the
whole, if not The entire currency of She
country.
The civil war, which had broken
out the spring previous, was still GO
ing Oh; but the people III the Southern
States, laboging under sense OF
greyIous wrongs, and believing that
they were engaged in a righteous
cause, were animated by most
determined spirit OF resistance ard by
the strongest hopes Of ultimate sue
cess
Prudent and discreet men through
cut the country were receiving aud
paying out the currency then in circu-
lalion, in discharge Of debts contract
ed before the war. The foot of the
Invader had not then made its im-
press upon the soil of Warren county.
In this state OF things what was the
executor to do? Was he to fold his
arms, do nothing and take the risk OF
the insolvency Of those indebted to
the estate, resulting from the casual
ties Of sthe war; Such course
might have resulted in much create
loss to the estate than if he had pro-
ceeded, as he did, promptly and
diligently to collect the assets and
turn them over to the parties interest
ed. IF the parties in this case, who
were living in Virginia, had been
willing to receive what the executor
was ready and willing to pay them, il
might have been used by them at that
early stage of the war, without any
great sacrifice or loss. The fact tina,
some ofthe parties resided in Missouri
was no reason why the executor
should postpone the performance OF
his duties.
One Of those parties, Cyrus ".
Vannort. did i'll the spring of 1862
visit the county of Warren, and could
have received from the executor his
share OF the money which had been
collected that the legatees did net
receive what had been collected was
no fault of the executor. The law
only reqeires that an executor or
other fdaciary shall act in good faitl
and exercise reasonable care anG
diligence in the discharge his duties
thai, is that degree of care which g
prudent man would exercise in the
management Of his own business
And in determining the question
whether he has SO acted, we must
csnsider and weigh the circumstances
by which he was called upon to act
and are pot to view his conduct il
the light of subsequent events, which
could not have been reasonably seer
and guarded against
The future is always involved il
uncertainty, and it is much easier t.
determine after than before an event
has transpired what would have beer
the safest and most judicous men
throughout the county had, in The
management Of their own affairs
pursued a course different from that
of the executor in this case, 1ber
there might have been some ground O
complaint, but it is well known thai
such was not the case.
The case OF Williams executors vs.
Skinker, &c 25sh Grattan, cited bl
complainants.' counsel, in my iudg-
ment, is entirely different from th.
ase under consideration.
This case much more nearly resem
oles the case of Elliott VS.. Cart 7. &c.
9 Gr4ttan, 81, in which the principle
by which a fduclary is to be governed
are clearly stated. Here follows ,
lengthy review Of the above cited case
ghich is omitted for want of space.
Applying these principles to thi.
casss | am Of the opinion that the exc,
cutor of Jacob Vannort ought not t,
be held responsible FIR the los.eI
resulting from tho collection of debt,
due the estate during the war. The
monies collected BY him during tina,
time, except what was applied in
/ payment Of expense and dcbts wer,
invested in Virginia bonds and Con-
federate States treasury notes.-the
latter utterly persisted, whilst the for
mer have becn sold and the n-ooopd,