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/ssactsengr0785 and id is 1 raw text is: RANKIN V. WEGNELIN
testator having been illegitimate. The widow died, and left the Petitioner her
personal representative.
For the Petitioner it was contended, that, by the statute of 31 Ed. 3, c. 11, the
Ordinary was to grant administration to the nearest and most lawful friends; and by
the 21 Henry 8, c. 5, he was required .to grant administration either to the widow or
the next of kin, or to both; but there was no provision as to the distribution of the
effects ; consequently, after payment of debts, the administrator was entitled to retain
for his own benefit; but, by the Statute of Distributions, 22 & 23 Car. 2, c. 10, the
widow was to have one moiety, and the next of kin the other. Thus she would take
one moiety under the statute, and as there was no next of kin, she would take the
other moiety according to the law which existed before the 22 & 23 of Car. 2; and
that Mr. Justice Blackstone, in his Commentaries, vol. 2, p. 515, in writing of an
administrator, observes- Concerning whom, indeed, there formerly was much debate
whether or no he could be compelled to make any distribution of the intestate's
estate. For though (after the administration was taken in effect from the Ordinary,
and transferred to the relations of the deceased), the spiritual Court endeavoured to
compel a distribution, and took bonds of the administrator for that purpose, they
were prohibited by the temporal Courts, and the bonds declared void at law. And
the right of the husband not only to administer, but also to enjoy exclusively the
effects of his deceased wife, depends still on this doctrine of the common law, the,
Statute of Frauds declaring only that the Statute of Distribution does not extend to
this case. And as the equity followed the law, it has been decided that whoever.
takes out administration is trustee for the husband. You cannot therefore, apply
that rule in the case of a husband, and not of the wife ; therefore, if an illegitimate
husband died, leaving a wife, and administration is granted to A. B., he is trustee for
the wife.
THE VICE-CHANCELLOR [Sir Lancelot Shadwell] having made up his mind, did not.
call on the counsel on the other side to reply; but said, that, in whatever way the
question would arise, if there be no persons to answer the character of next of kin,
the Crown is entitled; and I believe it [141] to be so completely undenied as to be
received as the law of the land. Thirty years ago, if the same question had come
before me as counsel, I should not have hesitated in saying, that the Crown was
entitled to the moiety not given to the widow. If, as it appears, the received opinion
of Westminster Hall has been in a given form for a number of years, I shall not upset
it. What I mean is this, where a man is illegitimate, and dies without issue, and
leaves a wife, and the wife administers the estate, she is entitled to one moiety under-
the statute, and the other goes to the Crown.
Counsel.-Mr. Wigrain and Mr. Wilbraham, for the Petitioner, and Sir W. Horne
and Mr. Knight, for other parties; but they did not address the Court.
Registrar.-Mr. Hussey.
[141] RANKIN V. WEGNELIN. Nov. 7, 1836.
Interest not allowed to Tenant for Life under Circumstances.
This was a petition, praying (amongst other things) that two sums of money,
secured by two bills of exchange, might be paid into Court and laid out, and that a,
Mrs. Wegnelin might be allowed a sum of money in respect of interest thereon.
Colonel Wegnelin, by his will, directed that his trustees should realize certain
sums of sicca rupees which were due to him by the East India Company, and invest
them in the 3 per cents., and should pay the dividends to his wife for life.
The East India Company contracted with the trustees to repay the money
borrowed at the rate of 2s. 6d. for each rupee, and gave two bills payable at twelve
months' date.
Mrs. Wegnelin sought to have interest at the rate of 4 per cent. paid to her on,
the two sums secured by the bills, which produced no interest.
For Mrs. Wegnelin it was observed, that one year having to elapse before the
bills were paid, the East India Company agreed to allow 2s. 6d. for the rupee instead of
2s. 1d., its real value; and that as there was a gain of 5d., the tenant for life ought
280
DONN=. 141.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0785&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)