HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0350 and id is 1 raw text is: PEARSON V. GAMON
been confirmed by the king, and if not, they are of no force, but if they are valid, it
is too late to make the objection now, for on the 18th of April last Tyrrell's proctor
was assigned to declare whether he opposed the latter will or not.
Judgment-Sir George Lee. I was of opinion the objection did not come too late,
for tui non interest might be objected at any time, but more especially before issue
joined, and that by the laws of Barbadoes, negroes belonging to a plantation are glebw
adscriptitii, and are part [268] of the real estate, and therefore pronounced against
the interest of Mrs. Tyrrell to oppose the last will in this Court, she having no
interest under the first will in the deceased's personal estate.
PEARSON against GAMON. Prerogative Court, Trinity Term, June 16th, 1756--A
creditor having made his option to sue in Chancery by a bill of discovery, must
be bound by such option to proceed in that Court.
[Considered, Walsh v. Bishop of Lincoln, 1874, L. R. 4 Adm. & Ec. 242.]
John Hemming is the deceased; Richard Gamon is his executor. In April, 1755,
Pearson, a creditor by bond, cited Gamon to bring in an inventory and to take
probate; he brought in a declaration in which he said that the deceased carried effects
with him abroad, of which he could not then give any account, but would when he
received any. No objection was taken to the declaration, and Gamon was dismissed.
In May, 1755, Pearson filed a bill in Chancery against Gamon, for a discovery of
deceased's assets, to which, in July, 1755, Gamon answered, and that cause is now
depending in the Court of Chancery. Pearson again cited Gamon to give an inventory
in the Prerogative Court. Gamon appeared under protest, and alleged that Pearson
had made his option by filing a bill for a discovery in Chancery, and that he ought not
to be harassed in both courts for the same matter, and prayed to be dismissed with
costs. Pearson replied that Gamon had, since filing the said bill, had an account of
deceased's effects from abroad, that he could not have a full discovery of said effects
under his present bill, but must amend it, which would be in nature of a new bill, and
therefore that the matter was a res integra, and he was at liberty now to proceed
in this Court.
[269] Judgment-Sir George Lee. But as there was now a bill for discovery of
deceased's assets depending in Chancery, I was of opinion it was not a res integra ;
that he h ad deserted this Court where he had originally begun, and had made his
option to proceed in Chancery, and could not revert to this Court while that suit
was depending. I therefore rejected Pearson's petition, and condemned him in
11. 6s. 8d. costs.
CLARK against CLARK AND OTHERS. Prerogative Court, Trinity Term, June 16th,
1756.-The expenses of a commission of appraisement to be paid out of the estate
of an intestate before distribution, but after the payment of the just debts.
George Clark, a freeman of London, subject to the custom, died intestate, left no
children, but left a widow, Hester Clark, who is entitled by the custom to one moiety
of his personal estate, and to half the other moiety also by the statute of distribu-
tion, and he also left a sister, Hester Taylor, widow, and several nephews and nieces,
who are entitled to distribution. Taylor entered a caveat and prayed a commission
of appraisement, in which the deceased's widow joined. Taylor now prays that the
expences of the commission of appraisement may be paid out of the estate. Clark
opposes it on suggestion that the estate is insolvent, in which case the court never
orders expences to be paid out of the estate, because it would injure creditors.
Judgment-Sir George Lee. I decreed the expenses of the commission of appraise-
ment to be paid out of the estate before distribution, in case it shall hereafter appear
that [270] there is any estate remaining to be distributed after all the just debts are
discharged.
REEVES against GLOVER AND OTHERS. Prerogative Court, 2d Session, Trinity Term,
June 23rd, 1756.-An allegation propounding an unfinished paper admitted to
proof.
William Finch died 5th December, 1755, made his will dated 20th June, 1743.
Mrs. Reeves, executor, she propounded that will and three codicils, A, B, C; Mrs.
Puddephat, one of deceased's next of kin, and a legatee in a latter as well as said
will, propounded a schedule wrote by deceased in July, 1752, above three years before
2 LEE, 268.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0350&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)