The comet. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1877-1882, 1880-05-08

debtor, was a nonresident Of the State NJ
the time of Peale's death.
Q. That, Notwithstanding Whites estate
turned out to be solvent, yet, Klein, IN
making the compromise. acted under the
advice of counsel, and was guilty OF no
negligence.
Pittman. Pittman Il Smith for appellant.
Buck a. Clark for appellees.
GEORGE, I. j.,
Held
/ II is true that the grant of letters tes-
.omantarv. or of administration IL local,
confined TO the State in which the grant -
made and that such grant coniers no
nower on the executor or administrator III
n foreign State. This principal IS appleu
without exception or qualiiicatlon 10 au a,.;
larry administrations, since they heccssa,
iv have no concern with any assets, except
those within.the local Jurisdiction, as their
sole duty is to collect the assets there, ailu
after nayment of claims in that J!irisulc-
ton TO remit the surplus for maj uistri-
hution IN the executor or administrator
annoiuted i'm the domcil of the decedent'
But when applied to executors on aulii'i tis,
traitors appointed in the domlcii Oh ind
decedent, which administrator - vdned
II.
ewcentions. Thus it is settled that INC
principal or domicilary administrator ii".
receive voluntary payment from. ana eyeh
a,,o n dehtor residing in foreign Jurlsdic-
tion. If he shall voluntarily come withih
the State in which he is appointed: ;..;s
9, Where there are no deDts III tie yura
diction where foreign debtor resides, anu
no auxiliary administrator ,, nai strator
granted there. the principal admlhistra.oi
NAV in such foreign State, receive = voluiiIi,
tary nayment from the debtor, when VIII
he a good acquittance to him, even II ah
oun;llory administrator should be aftcrward
appointed. ,,,,,;s.r.tor have
possession of Il note payable 10 ms in.essa'I
or bearer, he may rs the lawful hoiuer anu
bearer of such note sue on 1t in Il iorlegh
jurisdiction. !; ,,t;-
4 The principal administrator IS emil
fled TO have the surplus in the hands OF IN
auxiliary administrator transmitted 10 MN
for thc nayment of debts, and such surplus
will also be generally transmitted TO the
principal administration for distributor
among the legatees and TINS course IL
generally pursued; unless mere pc nr su,nr
that the distribution should be made Dy
the auxiliary administration:
4. The principal administrator Is the
owner of the debts due the lnestatG,
wherever the debtor may reside, Us such
debts are now recognized as following tne
person of the creditor, and have locallty AZ
his domicil, and especially is this owner
ship and title of the principal auhiins.i"
tor recognized as to all debts, the evidence
of which. as bonds, bills or notes, come 10
his possession in the place OF the dohlich
of the inestate.
6. II thus appearing that at least as 10
debts due the decedent, the securities LOT
which, are in possession OF MS pIinclpa,
and original administrator, the tue anu
ownership are III him, with the right 10
receive payment and give acqulttances
therefor. it must follow that he would be
held responsible for their due admlhlstra-
tion. as in case of domestic debts, If there
were no other obstacle to their collectioh
than exists in relation to domestlc oepts.
I. The principal administrator VIII De
held to be excused only when ne mas
shown that he has done all that was rea-
sonably within his power to secure tie
collection of the debt. lie mas nov uono
his duty when, as in this case, he mas mere
ly transmitted the claim to lawyer III inc
foreign State for collection, when he has
been appraised in ample time that no steps
have been taken for collection by his attor-
new, nor has he done his duty wheh
he accepts as a compromise, whatever sum
the debtor or his legal representative snail
| voluntarily pay. $40.
s. But in this ease, the executor was
without the excuse of want OF power 10
sue, He could have sued in foreign
State in his own name. Peale was not Il
creditor of White at the time OF tne
formers death. lie was his mere surety.
The relation of creditor aud debtor was not
created till Jan. list, 1868, when Klein, as
executor. paid the acceptance. In such q
case, the rule is, that the administrator may
sue the principal either in his own name,
or as administrator.
| 8. Klein claims that he is eXonerated,
because he acted under the advice OIL
counsel. 1t appears that counsel had
advised him to compromise, upon the
ground that the claim was barred by the
statute of limitations of Louisiana. Inc
attorney under whose advice he acted,
stated in his deposition that he had nothing
placed into his hands except the bill OF
exchange drawn by White and accepted
by Peale, and that by the law of Louisiana,
if nothing more appeared than what was
shown on the face of the bill, the claim
was barred. The attorney was. not ADVISED
that Peale was an accommodation acceptor
for White, and that his executor had PAID
the draft for Whites benefit. He stated
that the claim thus arising from the pay
ment, was not barred, and that he would
not have given the advice if he had known
these facts. They were well known to
Klein, and he was guilty of ineXcusable
negligence in not communicating them TO
his attorney. twas his duty to commune
cate all the material facts to his attorney,
if he desired to protect himself by his
advice.
Decree affirmed.