Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1913-01-02

of counsel was had and proper. steps
taken to make valid sale. IN relefen aSse
10 this branch of the case the plaintlff
was asked: 20. Was il understood when
that 1.-THE list of credtorsD was made; |
that Nj. Woodbury. would notify or send
the list and notices to the creditors? A. |
That was the way | understood IL y.
You understood that he was not TO pay |
for the goods until that had been gone
according to the statute. didn't you? A.
Why, yes, yes. g. He refused to pay
anything that morning? A. fes;;., .,a
They undertook to comply with the
attached the goods within five days IRON
the date of the meeting at Belfast.
Under such circumstances there couiu
be no sale to the defendant,
The plaintiff urges that Chapter ia; OF
the Public Laws of 1905, which requires
fun information TO be given TO creators
constitutional lin that it deprives per
sons of their rights, privileges and hper-
ty to control their property, and thus
stitution of Maine. We are of the opinion
that the objection stated is insufficient to
Justify the conclusion that the act Is I'M
constitutional. - -.
In j, p. squire Co VS. Teller, 1856 Mass.
is, in which a similar statute was under
| consideration, the court say: Ihat the
purpose of the Legislature evidently was
| to provide creditors protection against
/ class of sales which are frequently Irauu-
ulent and WHICH leave creditors WITH no
ought to receiReAfrhat this is within
/ class of legislation for which there rs
/ constitutional authority is too pam Ier
| question-The statute requires of the
/ vendor nothing that cannot be done Win
/ reasonable effort. IL he is unable or uh-
willing. to pay his debts, it puts a SUP.
/ wants to dispose of his stock of mer-
| chandise in bulk and receive payment Tor
| himself Lemienx VS.. Young, I'll y. :
fo1 TIVE 4on.snit eas properly ordered, and
| the entry Will be 49,
/ Exceptions oVerruleq.
Eben A. Holmes VS. Harriet y. Adams,
Rescript, Hanson. j.
/ This is an action for money had and
treceived and comes to this court on the
/ foIlowina agreed statement of facts:
i Aonzo Patterson. brother OF the deiehd-
i ant Harriet a. Adams, was a resiaent
of the State of Nevada and died IN that
/ state previous to May 90 1907 leaving no
widow or issue His estate was duly ad,
ministered in the State OF Nevada, anu u
1.-The defendant, Harriet A. Adams, on NAY
20 1907 received from the administrator
of said estate the sum of $3.50 u, as nes
proporton of said estate, being one-halI
Patterson received the other half OF SAD ID
estate as his share The plaintiff IN TINS
action received no part of said estate.
1 The following is correct copy Oh so
much of the Compiled Laws Of the state
of Nevada, as relates to helrs s OF
1 nightmare children or their offspring,
complied In lSo1 IL - 400
lillegitimate child shall be consideled "a. as
an heir of the person who shall acknoWi-
edge himself to be the daihs declaraton
1 to that effect In the presence or one
credible witness who shall sign the, Gee.
aration also az sd @rtaes a. d heir cf the
A mother. and shall inherit in who,e or IN
part as the case may be, IN me same
manner as if born in lawful wfdlock.
frhe issue of ali marriages deemed null in
law or dissolved by divorce spaH
legitimate. - ,croI;,,s
Holmes, deceased, and claims that saia
Il Aureiius Holmes was the illegitimate
4 child of Rhoda A. Patterson, mother OF
said Aionzo Patterson. deeea ss facts the
IT, under this statement oil Iacts, the
nlaintiff can maintain this action upon
proof of the relationship claimed by MN,
a non-silit to be entered av.,
The writ and pleadinss are haue pa
II is eontended by the counsel for the
| plaintiff that this actioii may NC 49,
/ The words "in the same manner as
# born in lawful wedlocN s,, appeaf should
have the same force and effect as the Act
of 1887, CHI "A, Public Laws OF M ii,inei
which includes in express terms
aSu Raca1ee m ID of the Act of 1887 is
almost identical with the statute OF 80
vada. and he has remedy ~ W. LIE I,,dea
notwithstanding the decree OF the J ,ahs,
| nf Probate in Nevada ordering distripu-
ton of the personal estate iiiVoiNeo ~
| this case.
The defendant contests each position
taken by the plaintiff
| CHI. Il of the Public Laws Oh Maine ioi
the year 1887 reads as fohoWs.
/ "An illegitimate child born after MaTcn
| "a. in the year of our LORD loof 10 Ia
! heir of his parents VINO lhterHlai MAJ The
/ any such child born at any tl lliSd TIC
| heir of his mother. Ana provloea,a o r
him or her into his family, or in writing
acknowledges before some Justice o. t ,hs
/ neace or notary public, that he is tne
| father such child is also tue fe H. VI fora7
' or her father And in either or the l1iss, ,
| going cases, such child ana vs. issus IND
inherit from its parents rsspectiVeaIy, , ai,
J from their lineal aud collate II hiiuIeu
! and these from ouch chlia anu ~ ''
'h Wb baiae a igbts the plaintint ms are
| derived from legislative ehactilieliatt ~
common law his father WAS llcapaoittb %
i9hsriting e. Tsaa u the
9rreed statement have been passed upon
i'm many states ard II has been u a ;iiaaitis
held that a statifr aHoWia3 ~, ~, moTja,
mate child to inherit ii9 LOU, - ' from her
lineal or Collateral kindred; eye oiV,
Ell Messer vs. Iones, IS Maine 3fs. Iral'
VS. Atwood. OS Mass. pi ,S n.y. o
Vt 5S5: Stevensons Heirs VS. Suiiivaht H. .
Wheaton 207 In. the same au! .i ~ stat
r,lle requiring strict construction oi ,,f ia ~
utes is emphasized. Applying are maj the
the ors ssatq tSe Of am Nevaa a. Il born in lawful
wedlock'' do not in this case enlatSr w
rights of the plaintiff 70 i heraiue kindred.
lance from lineaI or cola 'g Dior 10 the
Pratt VS.. Atwood, supra