It is not a fraud in stockholders of a company not res-
ponsible for the company's debts, to ask the passage of
an act to enable the company to issue bonds, holding
the private property of stockholders liable; and a stock-
holder may advance money on such bonds and the
transaction will be good, if free from fraud. Carter
vs. Neal,
See Practice in Superior Courts, 3.
See Covenant, Ejectment, 1, 2, 4. Estoppel.
1. In an action of trover for promissory notes, the mat-
ter in issue is the title to the notes, and not the consid-
eration for which they were given. Wight vs Hester,
administrator,
2. Promissory notes are evidence of their own value in
an action of trover. Id.
3. In an action of trover for a promissory note,
whether the party who made the contract gave too
much or too little, for the property for which they were
given, cannot be enquired into. Id.
1. The misconduct of trustees, for the sale of property,
it may be waived; and a subsequent offer to fulfil the
contract, and urging a compliance on the other side, in-
stead of treating the contract as at an end, amounts to
a waiver. Rhodes vs. Doss et al.,
See Damages, 2. Vendor and purchaser, 2.
J. R. died in 1803, leaving a considerable estate. By the
4th item of his will, he declares as follows: "After the
foregoing dispositions, I give and bequeath my whole
estate, real and personal of what description soever, in
manner and form following: To my beloved wife Jane
Nesbit, the sole direction of the whole, with the guar-
dianship of my several children by her, until they ar-
rive at the age of twenty-one years, respectively, when
each of my children shall receive a share or dividend
of my estate, in just proportions by appraisement of
my executor, &c., reserving one-third of my estate to
the exclusive use of my beloved wife during her life,
and at her demise, the said third part to revert to my
children, or the survivors, share and share alike," &c.
And the 5th item of the will is as follows: "Should it
be the divine pleasure of Almighty GoD, to take from
this life my dear wife, and all my children, before
they arrive at maturity, or in case of their all dying
single or childless, then in that case, what may remain
of my said estate, shall go to my brothers, William, An-
drew, Alexander, and David, and their heirs, in four
equal proportions, &c." Held, That under the words
of the will, the daughters took a fee, defeasible upon
the events of either dying before arriving at woman-
![[ocr errors]](https://books.google.com.mx/books/content?id=ypADAAAAQAAJ&output=html_text&pg=PT4&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&q=charge+the+jury&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U0fpI1mh029UP3ps3GCxaNuEOKE8Q&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=202,1682,8,8)
breach of a trust growing out of the same transaction,
when an investigation of one involves an enquiry into
the other. Cleghorn et al. vs. Love,
4. If trustees to sell and pay debts, sell within a reason-
able time for a fair value, and apply the proceeds faith-
fully to the payment of the debts, they have discharged
the trust to that extent. Id.
1. If A. sells land to B. giving him a bond for titles, and
subsequently conveys to C. who has full knowledge
of the prior sale, he is in no better condition than A.,
but is affected with all the equity existing between the
previous parties. Rhodes vs. Doss et al.,
2. A person having no title, conveying land by deed with
warranty, and subsequently acquiring title, cannot re-
cover the land from his feoffee. O'Bannon vs. Para-
mour,
Practice in Superior Court, 1.
The verdict of a jury may be amended in form, to cor-
respond with the manifest intent of the jury apparent
Notwithstanding time is of the essence of the contract,
it may be waived; and a subsequent offer to fulfil the
contract, and urging a compliance on the other side, in-
stead of treating the contract as at an end, amounts to
a waiver. Rhodes vs. Doss et al.,
J. R. died in 1803, leaving a considerable estate.
4th item of his will, he declares as follows: "After the
foregoing dispositions, I give and bequeath my whole
estate, real and personal of what description soever, in
manner and form following: To my beloved wife Jane
Nesbit, the sole direction of the whole, with the guar-
dianship of my several children by her, until they ar-
rive at the age of twenty-one years, respectively, when
each of my children shall receive a share or dividend
of my estate, in just proportions by appraisement of
my executor, &c., reserving one-third of my estate to
the exclusive use of my beloved wife during her life,
and at her demise, the said third part to revert to my
children, or the survivors, share and share alike," &c.
And the 5th item of the will is as follows: "Should it
be the divine pleasure of Almighty God, to take from
this life my dear wife, and all my children, before
they arrive at maturity, or in case of their all dying
single or childless, then in that case, what may remain
of my said estate, shall go to my brothers, William, An-
drew, Alexander, and David, and their heirs, in four
equal proportions, &c." Held, That under the words
of the will, the daughters took a fee, defeasible upon
the events of either dying before arriving at woman-
the will was read over to him, or by him, or to show
that he gave instructions for such a will, or to show
something equivalent as evidence to one of these facts.
Hughes vs. Meredith and wife,
2. A paper in which it is declared to be the last will and
desire of the person who executes it, and in which he
revokes all former wills, and leaves his property to be
distributed under the laws of Georgia, is a will, and
the Ordinary has jurisdiction to admit it to probate.
Lucas vs. Parsons et al.,
3. A will disposing of property as the laws of distribu-
tion would decide it, is good, and the Ordinary has ju-
risdiction of it. Id.
4. A contested will may be read to the jury, as the sub-
ject to which the evidence is to apply, and the reading
imparts to it no validity. Id.
5. The subscribing witnesses may be permitted to testi-
fy that they subscribed the will in the presence of the
testator, whether the attestation clause so states or not.
Id.
6. When a caveat against a will charges the will to be
the result of a special delusion against the caveator,
the attention of the jury ought to be called specially to
that issue. Id.
See Jurisdiction. Slaves, Emancipation of.
|