DECEDENT ESTATES.
Senator Viehe's bill [S. 351] concerning the settlement of decedent estates was read the third time by sections.
Mr. EDWINS moved to amend Section 44 by striking out the words "and ornament." He said: I do this from the fact that I think, after the decease of a person, the word "ornament" might embrace a great deal of property in the shape of diamonds and other valuable jewelry, and it would leave a very large loop-hole that ought not to be in there.
Mr. STEWART--That has been the law since 1852, and I never have seen any difficulty under it. If you strike out the words "and ornament," then the administrator could go and pull the wedding ring off the widow's finger and sell it.
On motion by Mr. FANCHER, the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. HUFF moved to amend Section 126 as follows: Add after the word "value," in the sixth line, the following: Provided, however, that nothing in this act shall be so construed as to prevent the appraisers of one County from appraising the page: 164[View Page 164] lands of decedents situated in an adjoining County, where it is convenient to do so. He spoke in favor of the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. CARTER moved to amend the bill by striking out Sections 9, 3 and 94 of the printed bill. He said that these sections provided that no action can be brought against decedents on account of contracts executed by other parties. The practice heretofore has been that a suit should be brought against the persons still living, and the adminstrator be made a defendant with the decedent when judgement was rendered. If that law stood, that would be sufficient against the administrator without filing a claim against the estate. Under these sections a litigated suit would have to be brought against the persons still living, and also file a claim against the estate, and both parties be litigants, thus causing two suits, whereas if the amendment prevails one suit would be all that is necessary.
The amendment was adopted.
Mr. KENNER moved to amend section 167 by adding the following condition upon the finding of the Court upon any report showing the receipts and expenditures by the executor or administrator. An appeal will be to the Supreme Court as in final judgment. He said we oftentimes find estates which have administrators and executors a long time, and oftentimes leave a will and oftentimes estates remain unsettled until the youngest child becomes of age, and the administrator may go to Court with a report showing a certain condition of affairs, and the Court says: It is not right, and rejects the report, and there is no appeal and the administrator must submit to what the Court says. This amendment gives the privilege to appeal to the Supreme Court, with a report showing receipts, expenditures, etc.; the same as a party would upon the final report. I think it is right and in the interest of administrators settling estates. Courts may disagree, and wrongfully, too.
The amendment was adopted.
