The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1883-10-25
NO. 80

OF this account, and we have seen the onaSticn
aple methods by whichit was obtained the Gu
Iious might make the caleulafion and II 1To,id
illustrate The fact that Interest is n fievouyi,1o
clement but for the purposes of this case II
cannot be reached or remedied and Innsf re-
nam, as many Others an intrenched and un-
corrected error. 800 -
WIN himself as administrator of John w Era
zler Decd on this subject so in 1867 we find a
statement of what is called interest liabiIitjes
1851, in which interest is again comnnted on
oileSe balances and added together as a charge
In 1858 the balance is regarded as so small as
n0S 10 be mentioned but in 1854 it is stated as
wy, which is not the interest on the whole
amount OF the sum overpaid which was S5Y73 fj.
nor is It the interest at the legal rate on the bal
ance, after deducting the amount due from + II
phi, which was S2399 81. but is q fancy
sKeIch by the commissioner, thus:
| FOR the year ending LIST OF January, 1855 (the
year lS5i)his estate may be fairly held to account
| on the score of interest on yithdraNyaIs over.
| ana ABOVE contributions for the sum of $780," 1t
would seem from what has gone before that
| that sum had been before sufficiently taxed with
commissions GO and interest a. W.T. han
in ike manner s57o for 1G $50 1872 s35 1865
Fly S0 SS for ls 81 ri s67 SIS ''7O i0O0 si
| And the com missioner nalYely observes that
he gegqga tbs eoye as The ar interest abi
pc eoitendsd successfully that this fan
cliul ana arb esaIy dealing with a-dead mans
estate, hiu III accordance with no rule of law and
no precedent, and no authority save what the
commissioner is pleased to say he considers may
to receive the sanction OF any court of Justice
And taken In connection with this unsupport-
ca charge Of interest against Jno. w. Fraziers
statement thus:
''As to William Frazier the same may b @ sal
US III the case OF randolph, and in addition
thereto it may be remarked that he having been
all the while che managing and working partner,
even llau ne WltnuraWn and Appropriated to his
Own use. much more tdrgety OF the partnership
funds than he appears TO have DONE such with
drawals should ialrly have been considered as
o
peRsotto1, and that us 10 them he should have
been held er0a0yoted from interest I;GLiIjtJJ n
seems that there was well nigh no end 10 the
compensation of this much com enSated suryiV-
ing ana managing partner. We have said
enough to show The manner in which This estate
was really wasted and ruined, and the way was
thus cleared for the statement OF commissioner
oihlih tiiat the estate ofJohn W. Frazier was an
usolVent estate, which under this system was
utterly wrecked, and the evil day only postpon-
cd 10y The purchase made by the heir upon COM
inS ol iiec, OF tlle springs and properly bought
by MS rather ut Sl5J,00J, and bought by HIM at
9zao, 1oJ and to when point he was followed by
the admir- in spirited contest before the auc-
uoneer, and which the heir at no VERY distant
day, was destined TO discover, when staggering
uider Tue load OF debt thus incurred, saw
TINS same property. knocked down at SI34 900.
winch was just SUFFICIENT TO pay the amount OF
debts due on il by him, CHEZ among winch was
the debt due his 1ather'S administrator created
by The methods herein before considered The
purchase by the heir was his own act and Though
the purchase was made by him under a mista-
Ken apprehension of facts caused by the errors
OF the court below against him mt This late dav
when so many transactions have interviewed
and so many rights vested, il would not now be
proper for this court to sci that sale aside. 1t
would be practically impossible to restore the
parties to their true position. ~,
But this does not apply to the second sale or
10 the proceeds of thai sale 1t is contended
that the SAID sale was made six months after the
decree directing the sale, and that under the
SAFE the purchaser is entitled TO hold his pur-
chase by virtue of the statue in that case pro-
Vided. 1t is not necessary to pass upon that
question IN the view we take of this case but
Inc iacts are that the decree did not become OPP
erltlVe until sixty days after it was entered and
the sale was maze acttiJs six months after the
expiration of the sixty days but under the cir
cunsances of this case, the long litigation here
IN which has run for nearly thirty years, il is
right to put here an end to this Irrigation and
tlis court Will not remand this cause for correc-
tlon OF errors, but having the whole subject be-
lore 1t and all the evidence i'll the cause, will
enter here such decree Will correct the
errors below as far as possible, by allowing the
sale 10 stand, and deereeing the payment OF the
money IN accordance with the rights OF the par
gles, una settlng aside so much of the decree
winch distributes the purchase money and en-
terlng here the decree which the circuit court
ought 10 nave entered. so much of all the de-
crees herein as allows salary to VIM. Frazier
as surviving and managing partner, is set aside
ana annulled. SO much Of all the DEGREES as
allowed VIM. Frazier commissions for the years
1898 and 1851, when he had not settled his ac-
commits; much of all DEGREES as allows VIM
Frazier credit for money Improperly vested in
confederate bonds so much as charged John
W Erazlers estate with interest on the so call
ed adVlncements from the partnership funds:
SO much as allows VIM. Frazier commission on
THESE adVancements and all of the unsupport-
same sums as interest liabilities from 1S53 To
IS6l inclusive except the year 1861 are set aside
Ssnd aniuiIed And these sums will be charged
upon the interest OF Wm Frazier in the funds in
the hands of his asSigneeS. This sum will he de-
cfeea 10 James y. Frazier against the said as
slSnees, ana against the purchasers of the Rock
bridge Alum Springs, and deereed to be a charge
upon the sad koekbridge Alum Springs proper
w IN the hands of the said purchasers second in
dignity TO the Campbell debt only and of eonaI
dignity with the deOt due John5T, Randolph
11 J5ahes A. FRAZER is entitled to recover of VIM
w o1If
ed sad VIM. Frazier, by the circnit co1rt for
ms l one half principal and interest. S27 4I25O-
IN account or commissions enormously allowed
Tor the year 1893, principal and Interest 81 7o6 81
On account OF commissions enormously allowed
Tor the year 1851, principal and interest $40 60
O " icc0unt OF interest liabilities enormously
charged principal and int So, 32I 90 On aceonnt
o. o. GohIeueflte money paid to self and scaled
~ properly MS na1 principal and interest less
SIVJ The amount allowed S2,950.O0 On account of
confederate Investments improperly made and
erIoneously allowed, his one half principal and
interest $l30Q0 Commissions on advances i'm
properly made as surviving partner to the es-
tate of John w. Frazier at i've per cent n snn,
aggresltng So, 2SS. 81 of principal with intereSt
on the several amounts from the first dav Of
JANUARY. IN each yearfrom 1855 to 1867, inclusive
Hliu 70 d IKE credit for interest allowed on each
Item Ill each year, which several amounts ag-
gteSate u sum largely i'll excess of S57, 629 A. as
o. Oetoper ISL, 1881, which is, under the circum-
stances, The only sum available for the correc-
uon OF errors against the said James A Frazier
~ ~ 10 .ierSlpre not necessary to farther sum up
me amount OF the Sums towhich the said James
A. Frazier is entitled And that sum of S57 (24 a
WIZ pe decreed TO the said James a. Frazier and
Springs property
!, FOR The foregoing reasons the said DEGREES of
the circuit court must be reversed and annulled
IN SO far as they are in conflict with this oninIon
DEGREES reversed.
Judge Hinton dissented upon the first
point of the jurisdiction of the Court
The other Judges concurred wholly with
Judge Laey.1