The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-04-22
MUST BE TRIED BY JURY.
TIE FORMER OPINION REAFFIRMED
Justices Of the Peace Cannot Try certain
Cases rs Heretofore-Severai ot"ef
Important Decisions.

The supreme court of appeals for seconu
time yesterday rendered decision III 'no
case of Mary Miller and reaffirmed the io''ho'
opinion, which created great deal OF u'scu'-
sion.
In this case the court decided that persons
charged with certain ofenses heretofore ue-
cded by justices OF the peace are enI''ieu ~
trial by Jury. When tho opinion was rem
dered it created lively discussion IA 'no
newspapers and among the members Oh en'
Legislature. which was then in session. Ln9
Attorney General of the state nnaiiy ~as
for a new hearing of the case, whlcn W." Wa
granted In du. time it was argued IN detah.
and Judge Fauntleroy yesterday rendered lhe
following opinion A.. .-, ON
the 18th day Of January. 1897. AFTER eiapolaso
argument and grave constellation anu snV
oninion delivered by Lewis, president. not
vet reported. but which Is published III the
Virginia Law Journal of January u, ~,
page 81 Upon rehearing. granted 10 tne
petition OF the Attorney General LOT tne
Commonwealth. the case has Deeh again
thoroughly and exhaustyely argued anu
upon matnre consideration OF the arguments
and authorities submitted. we adhere to the
former opinion and judgment OF TINS court
for the reasons therein stated. reversing the
action of the trial court. and ordering the
plaintiff in error 10 be discharged from GUS
toby"
Judge Lacy submitted dissenting opin-
ion.
ROBINSON AGAINST ROBINSON.
In the case OF Robinson against Robinson,
which had been appealed from the chancery
court Of this city. Judge tauntleroy delyereu
the opinion, reversing the Judgment OF lne
lower court. The following were the facts III
the case:
john A. Robinson died in this city on
August /, 1913 leaving considerable
amount of real estate. In bis Will. when was
duly probgted. lie left his widow, Mary T.;
Robinson. and two infant sons. Ashlin and
Anthony Robinson. as hls sole devlsees. The
widow renowned the provision made Tor her
in the will and qualified as executrlx named
in the will. On November o, 1850. the IN
FAINT. Ashlin Robinson, died in infancy and
on November 10. 1889, Anthony Robinson
died On infant
In the case of James Lyons. guardian of
Anthony Robinson Tor the sale OF his real
estate IN his lifetime. Commissioner Leake re-
ported on June 10, 1889. among other tningo'
that the infant children and Anthony Room
son each took an estate IN fee simple IN the
real estate left by Jonn A.. Robinson; upon,
the death of AshlIn Robinson his share passed
10 his brother Anthony IN fee simple. ana
that such estate would on the death OF An
thOny, though an infant, pass to his paternal
and maternal kindred IN moetles. The Court
subsequently ratified Commissioner Leakes
report.
THE CONTROVERSY.
The controversy then arose between the
paternal and maternal kindred of deceased
Anthony Robinson. in various places
throughout the will of John A. Robinson the
words children and descendants" are
used as equivalent and synonymous words.
The question. therefore, arises, what
estate did Ashlin and Anthony Robinson
infants aged respectively three and i've
years. and only children OF the testator. take
at his death. in the remainder or balance OF
his property. devised by the fourth clause or
the will, which reads as follows: Il give 10
my children by her and their descendants at
their death the remainder OF my property
THE OPINION.
I'VE think" said Judge Fauntleroy in his
opinion. 1t is too PLAIN for doubt that the
testator intended by the language of the de-
wise 10 give 70 his infant children, Ashlin aud
Anthony Robinson. al estate for life each IN
the remainder Of his property, with remainder
% the children OF the infant deylsees. The
words at their death are as restraining words
fully equivalent 10 the words Tor NE. ana
they show clearly the intention OF the tesla
tor 10 limit the estate given to the infants u
an estate Tor life. Any other construction
would render the words at their death mop
eratiye. insensiDle and unmeaning
The words OF this devise do not denote an
indefinite succession. they are not words OF
limitation yesting an Inheritance in the IN
FAINT devlses Ashlin ald Anthony Robinson.
but they are words OF purchase yestlng "a re-
mainder in their children as purchasers
under the will of their grandfather, the
testator John A. Robinson. AshiIn Rob
inson having died MINOR unmarried
and without issue. the contingent remain
der TO his children having failed. the
inheritance remained IN his infant brother
Anthony Robinson. who survived hun, as
the heir of his father. the testator John A.
Robinson. and Anthony Robinson having
died an infant. unmarried and without Issue.
all the estate possessed by him. having been
devised from his father. passed at his death
10 his paternal kindred 10 the exclusion OK
his maternal kindred.
An ERRONEOUS DECREE.
The decree of June %. 1889. was erroneous
in SO far as it adjudged and decreed that the
maternal kindred OF the infant Anthony Rob
inson are entitled TO any portion OF the real
estate of which he died seized and possessed,
and the decree of December q, 1880. atlrm- |
inc the decree of June 30 1889, and dismiss
Ing the petition of the appellants praying TO
review and reverse the decree Of June -, 1889.
is erroneous. and the Judgment OF this court
is TO reverse and anlul both DEGREES appealed
from
The court did not yesterday decide the
BETTE Thomas-Lewis case. Ii was under
stood. however that the opinion had been
prepared. but Judge Richardson had been
unable to examine 1t on account o. sickness.
The other cases decided were these:
Claiborne against Holland. From the Cir
cult Court Of Danyille Affirmed, Judge Lewis
delivering opinion.
Marshall against Baynes. From the Circuit
Court of Danvlle. Reversed, Judge Lacy de-
lyerIng opinion.
Wright against Wood. From Circuit Court
of Cuipeper Affirmed Judge Lacy deliver
ing opinion.
Porter against Porter. Further argued by
Major H. Taylor Scott for appellant and sub
mitted.
Hlldreth against Turner. Put on privilege
docket for November term.
Foster against City of Manchester. Argued
by Judge j. NJ. Gregory for plaintiff IL error
and Judge William l. Clopton Tor defendant
N error.
THE 4. ). IND BRAZIL =. y. LINE.