Crawford avalanche. (Grayling, Mich.) 1879-19??, 1899-11-30

DselsIsss That Nave Bees Made % Net
Evilence-

presumption Oh burNiNOIsnip cohsu'
tutes very knotty point which comes
up for solution from time to time In
law cases. IL two or more relatives,
heirs to each other, perish In one com
mon accident--e. e.. shipwreck, fire or
Ia falling building and no evidence ID
forthcoming as to which was the last
to die, the question Of survivorship,
important to the executors Of each, has
to be decided on purely presumptive
grounds, and the arguments brought
forward when such cases come into
, court are often In the highest degree
| ingenious and interesting.
A few examples, culled from the rec
ords Of the last three centuries, are
well worth consideration. In 1929 a
French lady and her little four-year-
old daughter were drowned In the
River Loire. Some important property
was involved, and, on appeal, the par
lament of Paris decided that the
daughter succumbed first, being by far
the weaker Of the two parties. On the
other hand, case, also in France,
was decided In contrary way only a
few years later. A mother and two
children Of tender years were murdered
i'm the dead of night. The widOwer
claimed his wife's property on the
ground that the children had survived
their mother and the property was ad-
judged to him, the argument admitted
being that the murderer would first
dispatch the victim he feared most.
A singular case was recorded In 1858.
A father and son, fighting in the
French army, which, in alliance with
that of Cromwell. defeated the Span
iards at the battle of the Dunes, fell
during the engagement, which COM
menced at noon. A daughter Of the
father, on the same day at noon, be-
came n nun, thereby rendering herself
dead in law, and the court had to set
tie which Of the three survived. 1t de-
cided ~ That the daughter died lin
law first, because her vow, being vol
untary, was cOnsummated instantane-
ously, whereas her fathers and her
brothers wounds were not necessarily
Immediately fatal; (2) that the father,
not having the physical powers of re-
sistance possessed by the son, died be-
fore him; 81 that the son therefore
survived. A case somewhat similar to
the last came on in the English Court
of Chancery fifteen years later. Gen.
StanwiX, his second wife, and his only
daughter by his first wife, were
drowned in a shipwreck in the Irish
Channel. A nephew of the general, as
his heir, claimed his property. An I'M
Gle ION the mothers side, as heir to
the daughter, did likewise, and rep
resentative Of the second wife also
claimed.
On behalf Of the generals heir 1t was
argued that the ship having foundered
In storm, the general was probably
on deck, and his wife and daughter,
being probably below, would be
drowned first. Counsel for the daugh-
ter's heir urged that the general was
old. and consequently feeble, while
the daughter was of particularly
strong constitution and nerve; and
counsel for the wife's heir brought ar
guments as to the probability Of the
Whe uuNluS DttH tue idSt W eAplTe.
Not soul was saved, and there was,
therefore, no shred of evidence as to
the incidents of the disaster, and the
case was so complicated that the court,
in despair Of arriving at conclusion,
advised compromise between the par
ties, which was eventually adopted.
Where drowning has been the cause
of death the fact that one Of the par
ties and not the other could swim Is
adduced, and the height Of
ingenuity was, perhaps, reached by the
executors of lady drowned with her
husband, when they contended that in
his efforts to save his wife the man
doubtless exhausted himself and so
sank first.
Cases such as these continue to arise
not infrequently, and, although they
are usually settled without going into
court, it is felt that it would be an adj
IL the law on the subject were
more clear than 1t is at present.