The Prince George's enquirer and southern Maryland advertiser. (Upper Marlborough, Md.) 1882-1925, 1898-09-02
WILLS AND REQUESTS.
~ LADY COOK, nee TENNESSEE CIAFIIN.

great Importance to people. and par
tlcularly so in 4 country where great
| possessions exist, or where the bulk of
lands and money is in the hands of a
comparative few. For it is a generally
admitted fact that very unequal dis
trihution of either is Incompatible with
4 nation welfare. Excessive wealth
and extreme poverty run together, and
are naturally inseparablc Notwitl!-
standing, equality is, and always must
be, an impossibility. FrugaIity, en-
terprise. industry. and intelligence.
will, il permitted. N,r continue to pro-
duce superiority in riches and power,
and it is right that it should do so,
otherwise the strongest incentives to
human eNertion would be taken away,
and the whole people would relapse
into Incidence and want and pristine
savagery. The protection ofproperty,
therefore, in giving every man the alb
solute enjoyment of whatever he may
have honestly acquired, is the founda-
tion and support of national and indi-
vidual happiness, and of all prosperity
and progress. But while reason and
experience prescribe that he should in
all cases have free enjoyment of his
goods and lands during his life, it does
not follow that it must be equally just
that he should have the absolute dis
posal of them after death, because this
tends to despotic exercise of power,
and opens the door to many other evils.
If young he may be guided by passion;
if old, by vindictiveness, by unjust par
tiality, or even by imbecility. There
should be limit, therefore, to the pow
er of disposal, 80 that no man may be
legally able to set aside the natural
claims of wife and children or to make
m inequitable distribution of his prop
erty either during life or after. 1t is
too much the custom to venerate the
English laws of Inheritance as if they
were sacredly immutable, instead of re-
garding them, as having commenced
in blood and tyranny-and as being
the scarcely disguised relics of an age
OF lust and conquest. They have come
down to us from the earliest feudal
times, altered in some respects to meet
modern changes, but nevertheless bear
ing the unmistakeable features of their
originals. And if we compare them
with the laws of Inheritance in many
other countries we shall find good rea-
son to doubt their fancied superiority.
The semi-savage Jews, for example, of
ancient Palestine, had more righteous
system, which they had no doubt bor-
rowed chiefly from the Egyptians; and
that of Arabia, from the days Of Ma
homet and earlier, still surpasses ours
in all the elements Of equitable jnris-
prudence. In neither of these could
the husband deprive his widow of her
lawful share of his property; nor cut
any OF his children off with shilling.
He might curse but could not disin-
herit them. Each had by law right
to 4 certain strictly defined proportion
In point of priority the widow came
first, next the children, and failing
these, the next of kin in their order.
No one could will any part of that
which he had inherited, and only re-
served portion of that which he had
of himself. In the latter case
it was deemed fit that some part of
that which had been personally ac-
quired by the testator's abilities should |
be at his absolute disposal, so that he
might bc able to satisfy his feelings,
aciuated by love, gratitude,
friendship, caprice, or any other motive,
provided his family were otherwise
competently pro:'ided for.
The right to make will is not, as
some appear to suppose, natural and
right. In England it was
first exercised as a royal privilege.
Next royal permission was given in a
few eases, or wills were made subject |
to the monarchs appreciation. The
testator usually prayed the King that
the royal sanction might be given to
his last wishes, and the church for OBJ
vious purposes encouraged the exten-
sion of the practice until it became
popular. Hence what had at first been
craved rs a privilege became afterwards
n prescriptive right, so that ultimately
any adult male, widow, or single woman
could make any sort of will respecting
all kinds of property, personality and
realty, except so much of the latter rs
to be entaled.
The fright to 4 mans own, although |
generally looked upon as an absolute
right, is not really 50, but exists rela-
tive to the rights Of the whole commu-
nitv of which he forms a unit. He can
lawfully do rs he wishes with his own
so long rs he is not prevented or in
hibitcd, but it is competent for any ma
ton to make such restrictions as may
be deemed necessary. The whole mat
ter is usually governed by expcdency,
md what would he suitable for one
state might be injurious to another.
Public polity, however, in all cases,