The Portland daily press., 1889-07-23

LAW TERN-wEsTERN DISTRICT.
MoNDAY-The following cases were disposed
of:
CUMBERLAND COUNTY.
Sherman w: Knewas and ais. VS.. James H.
Blawelt aud TT. Argued orally.
w. q. Chapman. ii. II. Virgin.
John W. Lane vs. Ezra Hawkes. and al. 10 be
argued in writing.
Cleaves. A. W. Coombs.
Susan $. Conant, applt from decision OF county
commissioners TO be argued In writing.
IT, NJ Ray MattOcks, CoOmbs q Neal.
George G. Gilman appellant from decision of
county commissioners IN awarding damages. To
Strout & Gage. Matte ks, Coombs g. Neal.
Michael Neil VS.. Canadian Pacific Railroad
Company. Exceptions overruled for want of
W. II. Lconey. CT. Woodward.
Michael ODonnel VS.. Samuel l.. Carleton.
Exceptions pnsl overruled for want Of prosecution
Bennett springer vs.. Bertha r. Hubbard. TO
be argued In writing. peg
Drummond & DrummOnd. 1. l.. Elder.
Lillian A. Evans VS.. George +. Mustard. Argued
Maria Gregor vs. Hannah L. Cady Argued
orally.
George Libby. W. ii. Looney.
Inhabitants of Deerng vs. Andrew j. Green
/ l.. Elder; George Libby.
ceptions overruIed for want of prosecution
Woodman & Thompson.
''~~ Mattocks, Coombs & Neal.
Laura J. Wescoil VS.. Johu Wescott. To be
argued ID writing
A. II. Mouton. Frank s. Larrabee.
Charles 5. Deake, adm. VS.. Mary Jane Deake
N. and II. b. Cleaves.
Mattocks, Coombs s. Neal
State VS.. James E. Cady To be argued in writ
ing.
Robinson, county attorney.
Inhabitants of Topsham VS.. John +. Blonoell.
Argued orally.
Barrett Potter q. ID. Parks.
Thn xpth tpfo
sent down: LII, i4s q.
Michael Stevens ct al VS.. Daniel Mayberry Jr,
ct al. ,'i.l = ~
Rescript by Walton jim an action against
husband and wife. the wife alone defending, to
recover for grain furnished as feed for horses
owned by tile wife and used by th husband In
his business, IL being admitted that most of The
grain was delivered on his credit; held, that the
action could not be maintained against the wife,
on The ground that she owned The horses, and
Such proniis-, made after The deit was contract
ed, would not he binding for want of cOnSidera-
ton; and not being in writing would be invalid
under the statue of frauds.
Mere O~nership OF the horses Is not sufficient
to charge her upon an implied promise.
:, Judgment a. anstithe husband, but not against
the wife.
Nathaniel W. Morse. Executor in Eq., VS.. Edwin
morrill, ct ais.
Rescript by Haskell, J.-It was clearly the ill.,
teniOn Of the testator to secure the net income Of
his real estate by means Of a trust, for his son,
Edwin and daughter, Mary Jane, during the
natural life of the survivor oi them. N
We are Of opinion, therefore, that the testator's
real estate was devised in trust To continue dur
ing the natural life o. he survivor of said chit
dren the net income thereof 10 be divided equal
ly between them so long as both lived, and upon
the death OF one TO be paid 10 the survivor during
life.
1t clearly the intention IL the testator, also
TO Increase the net income Of his real estate, by
directing that the small amount of personal
estate that he might leave should be applied in
aid OF the principal trust, by paying necessary
charges incident TO its proper administration itl~
We are tf opinion, therefore, That The personal
property OF the testator now IN the hands of the
executor, was devised In aid of the principal
trus', to be dlscreeily used and applied by the
trustee so that the net income from the real
estate may be maintained at high and unfO m
yearly sum for payment TO the ceStuis as possible
AS TO the ACCESSIBILITY of continuing the payments
necessary 10 secure any benefit froI a relief
society upon The dea Ii OF members, to which the
testator had acquired right, the court considers
that the trustee should decide having In mind all
the circumstances of the ease. ana that any dec-
son made by him in good faith should be csn-
elusive.
The actual disbursements OF this procee ding
and $25 each to the two counsel who have sub
mtted arguments should be paid by the executor
from the personal estate. Decree accordingly.