SALES BY INFANTS.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, the bill [H. R. 124--see page 150 of this volume] relating to sales by infants, was taken up, the Lieutenant Governor stating it has heretofore been read the third time, directing the roll to be called on its passage.
Mr. MENZIES said the Senate to-day has been doing things at break-neck speed. The effect of this bill is to take the real estate of infants out of the hands of the Courts, indirectly, by permitting them to deal with real estate as if they were of lawful age.
Mr. COMSTOCK insisted the two sections of the bill should be considered together. He challenged any Senator to point out anything unjust or inequitable. It is a bill which provides for the enforcement of good faith in the performance of contracts.
Mr. BELL said: The bill provides only that those falsely representing themselves of age shall not take advantage of their own money. The Court ought to say, as this bill does: "Release your hold on the consideration falsely obtained for the property in dispute." It only applies to cases where representations have bee fraudulently and falsely made.
Mr. MENZIES said this second section is an encouragement to minors to go around and represent themselves as of age, and the intriguing party of mature age, anxious to get hold of a piece of real estate, having a convenient witness, can go into Court and beat the minor every time. The bill will also be an encouragement to land-grabbers to go around and take advantage of minors.
Mr. SPANN could not see that this bill is against minors, but rather against the interest of some lawyers, shrewd enough to get minors after they come of age to disaffirm sales and divide the land with their attorneys under the existing law affecting contracts with minors.
Mr. TRAYLOR asserted the first section of this bill is not right because an existing law says minors can not alienate real estate inherited from parents. Trifling husbands can get hold of part of the property of a minor wife and dissipate it away, leaving no remedy for the wronged wife. This bill, if passed, would be an act in the interest of lawyers and litation. The second section of this bill is equally as odious as the first; and he gave instances to prove the position he took on this question.
Mr. FOSTER thought the bill ought to be passed, and he cited an instance in which, under the present law, a great wrong was done in the County he represents. No Senator can back up a vote against this bill.
Mr. BROWN considered the policy of law always has been to prohibit minors from making deeds to real estate. Such deeds are presumptively void, and the law should not provide for making it good by parole evidence. He would vote for the first section above very cheerfully.
Mr. CHAPMAN did not think the bill goes far enough, but as far as it does go it is in the right direction. This bill guards the right of minors. There should be no hesitation in providing that in order to disaffirm a sale the infant in law should make restitution.
The bill passed by yeas 31; nays, 15.
