Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1882-06-03


The following decision has b-en received
y A. e Otis. Esq, Clerk of the Middle l.v
District:
kEMEBEc COUNTY CASE.
ns,vey Scribner ct al. in rq. vs.. Catherine
Baker for pl6; whitmore for def anu
Rescsipt.-The complainsnts wa,s
mes with j. A. on q bond given bv bis SON r.
ss principal for tire faithful performances of
ms duties as cashier of bank. G. proved 10
oe defaulter, assigned an insurance noI;,.v
sh'ch ne had taken DOT upon his own life ,e~
MS father to indemnify him for his liabilities
upon this bond and certain other paper nhs
amonnt OF the insurance being more Than
,smcient TO cover them ALL and shortly aft.r
uled insolvent. three minor legitimate chill.
turs"ing him j. A. accepted the as
kn"eht' notined the insurance COMPANY
thereof, and received their consent ther.,c
paid premium which fell due thereon in
FORMED his co-surfties that he had received !,
and requested them to paw his third of IN.
sum due TN the bond. promisi. 2 TO r~imburse
mem when he realized on the life policy.
Ihey. however, paid nothing until called
upon by the bank after j. A. ! ad died also
ihsoivent Upon the cali of the bank the,
pald the amount of the cashiers deficit. one.
half each.
With the consent of ]. As executrix. G..
administrator took the policy, giving her an
indemnify. and collected and still holds the
amount thereof, though the complalnanfs
nave demanded so much thereof as was nee
essary to reimburse them for the amour,
which they paid, of both the respondents no
are respectively the executrix of J. A. and
the administrator of G. Held. that if the
minor children Of G. bad been joined as de
PENDANTS so that the rights of all parties might
De settled in one suit, complainants would be
entitled upon this showing to a decree in
equity that the assigned policy was held by
D. A. and the proceeds thereof by his execu-
trix through her agent, and by the admins.
traitor Of G. subject TO trust IN favor of the
compliments for their indemnity as o-sure-
ties with J. A. on the bond.
Held further, that the cosmetics were en-
titled to the benefit Of the indemnify under
such circumstances. although it was intended
by the assignor and assignee for the benefit
OF j. A. alone: that the consent given bv ].
AS executrix that her correspondent might
collect the money on the policy, and the fact
that he did collect and now holds it having
Undermined her. cannot relieve the executrix
from her responsibility to the complainants
for the trust fund; that the testimony of one
oi the compartments as to matters occurring
in the life time of j. A. is not competent in
this process against his executrix; that the
declarations of J. A. made after the assign
ment to him are not competent evidence for
the respondents; that it is not good prac-
tice to point the formal parts of documents
respecting which no question is made for
presentation to the court: and, finally, that,
before decree can be had for compliments
the minor children of the assignor must be
made parties to the suit and have an oppor-
tunity to be heard through their guardian,
and accordingly the case is
Remanded to nisi prius for further pro-
ceedingsin conformity herewith.