Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

The Abbeville Press and BanneJI BY W W. & W. R. BRADLEY. ABBEVILLE, 8. 0., WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 1906. ESTABLISHED lS4jjW Hi if Accountable to Wife f Him from Sale INTERESTING CASE, INVOLV LAW, TRIED IN THI TT7i/1/-k*rr Onv*nrvf TTnlrl vv iULfw vauuuu j-luiu. ble for Rents Al] and Remain in I 9 was Spent in Supi DECREE OP JU The State of South Carolina, a County of Abbeville. " In the Probate Court. In the matter of the EBtate of T. L Haddon, Deceased. P. B. Carwile, Executor, Petitioner. Petition for Partial Settlement. P. B. Carwile, the active executor of the estate of T. L. Haddon, deceased, petitioned the Court of Probate for a partial settlement of said estate. April 27, 1906, was fixed tor said settlement, aod notice thereof was duly published, in which notice all persons having claims against the estate of the deceased were required to file the same on or before the date fixed therein, or . be barred. In accordance therewith, Mrs. ?. A. Haddon, widow of deceased, filed two separate claims?one for the sum ol one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), money received by her husband and for which he had never accoumed to her. for a tract of land which belonged to her, and to which, at the instance ol her said husband she bad extculed a deed to H. R. Crawford. The other claim was for eleven bundled aud seven dollars and seventj-fh> centt ($1,107.75) being the value of rent cotton, received by her husband from ten ants who worked the land of the claimant, and lor which he had nevei accounted to her. To the payment of these claims tbe residuary legatees under the will oJ the saiu T. L. Haddon objected. Thereupon further proceedings in the matter of the proposed settlement were suspended until the 5th day of May, 1906, in order that testimony for and against said claims might be produced. In the meantime the residuary legatees were iormaliy notified to be present on said 5th day of May to intervene in their own behalf, and were, at least constructively, before the Court. M. P. DeBruhl, Esq , appeared as attorney for Mrs. Haddon, the claimant, and W. N. Gray don, Esq., for the residuary legatees. In order to a proper understanding of much of the testimony taken in the case, the following statement is deemed necessary, viz: On the 22nd day of July, 1889, T. L. Haddon executed a last will and testament in which he gave >.o his wife, E. A. Haddon, besides certain articles oi personal property, two tracts ot land, " ?? no *KA *1UAmn (root ff /mn. UUC Aliunu ao iuc XAV/iut navi) Wii taining 520 acres; and ibe oihei known as the "Ellis tract," and containing 163 acres. He then provided that, after the payment of bis debts, tbe residue and remainder of his estate should go in equal sbares to bis brothers and sisters. Several years after the execution ol this will, to wit: on tbe 18th day ol April, 1895, testator duly executed and delivered to his wife, tbe said E. A. Haddon, a deed to tbe identical twe tracts of land mentioned and described in tbe aforesaid will?and, of course from the date of thisdeed, these twe tracts of land belonged to Mrs. Had don, just as much so as If she bat bought and paid lor tbem. From the testimony it appears thai it was a part of tbe "Ellis tract" thai was sold to Crawford for which Mr Haddon was paid the $1,000.00? th< money now claimed by Mrs. Haddonand it was a portion of the "Horn* /i tract," all of which was embraced ir the deed from Haddon to his wife, tba he received tbe rents for which Mrs Haddon is now contending. Taking thete claims up in the orde: in which I have stated tbem, I s-hal tint consider the claim for the $1,000.04 received by Haddon from Crawford fo tbe Ellis lands. It was developed by the testimony that Mr. Haddon on the 30tb day o March, 1S87, executed a mortgage fo $500.00 in lavor of Mrs. D. J. Ward law, on this Ellis tract of land, whicl mortgage was still of force and unsat isfied when said tract of land was soli to Crawford, but of which mortgagi Mrs. Haddon claims to have bad n< knowledge, when she ixecuted th< deea to Crawford. Upon the advice of his attorney, W N. Graydon, Esq., Crawford refuse* to pay for the land until this mortgagi was satisfied?accordingly, by direc tion of Haddon, the mortgage, thei amounting to$500.00, (the interest pre aumably having been kept paid up was satisfied out of the $1,000.00. an< the remaining $500.00 was paid over t< Mr. Haddon. As against this claim, it is contend bv counsel for the residuary lega tee?, that, Mrs. Haddon, having mad no demand on her husband, during hi life time, for this money, but on tb contrary having acquiesced in his re ' f ceiving it and not accounting to he for it for a considerable length of time the presumption is that she intendei it as a gift to him?and that whetbe she did or not, ertainly as to so mucl of it as was appiitd to tbe satisfactioi of the Wardlaw mortgage, it was just and proper appropriation of th same. While Mrs. Haddon, under Sectioi 400 of the Code of Procedure, could nc testify as to wbat transpired betwee herself and her husband, he bein dead, which induced her to execut the deed to Crawford to the Ellis trac ifi In or Money Received by i of Her Lands. ING MANY NICE POINTS OF E PROBATE COURT. Husband's Estate Lia?>wed to Accumulate lis Hands, or Which )ort of the Family. DGE R. E. HILL. of land, this was abundantly shown by the testimony of others. It seems that Mr. Haddon wanted to raise some money, and had placed a tract of land in tho hands of Mr. R. S. Link, a real estate agent, for Bale. Mr. Link could not find a purchaser for this particular tract of land, but found a party in the person of H. R. Crawford, who wished to buy a portion of the Ellis tract, which, however, he had no authority to sell. Mr. Crawford, it seems, went to see Mr. Haddon and made a trade with him for a certain portion of the Ellis tract for which he agreed to pay one thousand dollars. Ah this land belonged to Mrs. Haddon, of couise, it was necessary that ?he execute the titles, and at- an in, ducement for her to do bo, Mr. Haddon > agreed to give her a thousand dollars worth of land to be taken from the . Wilton tract?which he never did. On this point J. K. Carwile testified , that Mr. Haddon told him that he ex? pecttd to run off one hundred acres of iand from the Wilton tract for Mrs. . Haddon in payment tor the land that he bad sold ol hers to Mr. Crawford. | Lou Liddell testified that he lived . witb Mr. Haddon for fifteen years; .! livt d on the Ellis place; that be knew , when the Ellis place was sold; that ! Mr. Haddon said to him on a certain occasion that he had given to Mrs. , Haddon the upper part of the Wilson r.lo/.A /%? tho r\Aht in?. r\f tKn TTIlio ninno pjav. ./ 1VI kUV- ^Vl ilVU V* IUV. XJlllO |/JMVV whit h be had eoJd to Mr. Crawford, , and that il he (Liddell) wanted to remain with him he wouJd have to move over there. The testimony of R. S. Link was strongly corioborative of the testimony of Carwile and Liddell. Ae against the presumption of a gift by Mrs. Haddon to her husband of tbis money?a presumption bated solely upon the fact that she permitted him to collect the same and retain and use it as his own for a few months, as he died in a little over six months after having received the money, is placed this array of undisputed evidence. Not only does it show that Mrs. Haddon did not intend to give this money to her husband, but that the husband himself did not so regard it. It is not a case of long acquiescence j oil me pari 01 a wue iu me use uy uer husband, of her individual property, trom which a gift might be inferred? | for aa baa been before elated, Mr. Haddon died in a little over six months af. ter having received the money. I, therefore, hold that even though there had been no proof to bhow that I Mr. tiaddon was to reimburse Mrs. ! Haddon, or repay her in other lande for that which be bad sold of bera and r induced her to execute titles to the f purchaser, and for which he received I tbe money, his estate would be bound to account to her for it. , Tbe mere possession of moneys bel longing to the wife by tbe husband, even with her acquiescence, is no auffi) cient evidence of a gift by her to him Iu support of this view, I would call attention to tbe case of Oliver vs Chance, South Eastern Kept. Vol. II, page 657, wherein the Court say "When the wife has a separate eatatt and tbe husband takes possession of it he becomes her general agent, and at such is accountable to her for the same." In DeLoach vs. Sarratt, Vol. 33 oi same Report, the same principle it laid down. In that case it appear* that A. A. Sarratt sold a tract of lane r belonging to his wife for which he rej ceived $2,000.00; this money he usee j for several years iu his own business . treating it as bis own. During this time be purchased a large tract of lane , and gave a mortgage on it to securt f the credit portion of the pure hast r price?defaulting in his payments, th? . mortgage was foreclosed, and the lane j sold, being subdivided into severa . tracts for that purpose. j One of these tracts was bought b} e Mrs. Sarratt and titles made to her 3 On this purchase Mr. Sarratt paid, fui u his wife, $2,000.00, claiming that it wai the $2,000.00 which he had receivec for the tract of laud of hers which h< j hud previously sold. e As the land sold under the foreclos ure proceedings as before stated, failec j to bring enough to satisfy the mort _ gage debt, judgment was entered uj \ against the mortgagor, the said A. A [ Sarratt, for the amount of the defi 3 ciency. The judgment creditor brought sui for the recovery of this $2,000.00 pait * by Sarratt on his wife's purchase, al g leging that it was the husband's mou 8 ey, and, therefore, should be appllet e to the judgment against him. In thii j. case the Court say: "When A. A r Sarratt received this $2,000 as purchasi , money he held the same for his wife j there being no proof of a gift to bin r of that money by his wife, and i k made no difference where he placed it Q whether as a deposit in a bans, or as i . loan to other narties. or in the pur e chase of other* property?as betweei himself and his wife, it was her prop n erty." )t lu Stiekney vs. Stickney, U. S. Su preme Court Reports, Vol. 33, pag 143, the Court say : "We think tha ? whenever the husband acquires possee ,t sion of the separate property of hi v ' .... . Ti, * wife, whether with or without her r consent, he must be deemed to hold it c in trust for her benefit, in the absence I of any direct evidence that she intend- e ed to make a gift of it to him." And, further, "There is no presumption of e gift by wife to husband, there must be t proof." c As still further bearing out this view o of the case, I might quote from Farmer vs. Farmer, 39 N. J. Eq.t page 211 ; Jennings vs. Davis, 31 Conn., page 138; also Doty vs. Wilson, 47 N. Y., page 580, and numerous other] cases. As to the point made by the attor- 5 ney for the residuary legatees, that $800.00 of the $1,000.00, received by Mr. Haddon, having been applied tc satisfying the mortgage on the Ellis * tract at least to that extent, the estate 6 of Haddon cannot be held to account, I have this to say: The debt, to se- a cure which this mortgage was given, 4 was a debt for which Mr. Haddon was primarily responsible, and that at " most the lands of Mrs. Haddon stood ] merely as security for its payment, and that, unless the estate of Haddon was insolvent, neither the lands nor . the moneys of Mrs. Haddon should be P taken to pay said debt without the es- J tate of Haddon being required to re- ? pay ii. | Now as regards the claim of Mrs. * Haddon for the rents collected by her a husband, from the tenants who rented her lands, I am disposed to take a ? somewhat differeut view as to his ac- _ countability therefor, from that held in j; referenoe to the claim just paseed up- ' on, and while I am not fully satisfied . that the estate of Haddon should not be held responsible for the same, I have concluded to give the estate the benefit of the doubt which lingers in J my mind. r The justne88 of this claim does not strike me with the force that the other ? did, for the reason that in this case ' Mrs. Haddon suffered her husband to , fnllortl the rents frnm VPRP fn VPRT fix- , tending back for a period of ten years; J to use the money as his own, doubtless * for her benefit as well ss that of him- ~ eelf, without any protest or objection * on her part. From all the circumstances of thiB . case, I have come to the conclusion that in all probability Mrs. Haddon at ' no time prior to the death of her husband ever entertained a thought of holding him or his estate responsible ! for these rents?neither do I think that it ever occurred to Mr. Haddon : that he waB expected, or woald be ex- * pected to account for the same?thereiu differing materially from the condi- . *5 -iJP.I -.J- it* " lion 01 anaim as regujuij iue muucj icceived by him for the land sold of hers. Beiog aware of the fact that Mr. Haddon was collecting her rente and using tbe same in defraying the general expenses of the home, wbicb he was very likely compelled to do, as the lands deeded to his wife comprised a large part of his most valuable lands. Knowing this, as she testified she did, ami allowing it to go on for a period of from six to ten years without objection, and in tbe absence of any circumstance tending to show that she intended to bold bim or bis estate responsible for this money, I am of the opinion that she is estopped from doing eo now. In support of this view of the case, see the case of Reeder & Davie vs. Flinn. 6 S. C,, page 240, wherein the Court say: "Where a wife permits ber husband to manage her separate estate for a number of years ^nd dispose of tbe income as he *ees fit, equity ( treats it as a gift to him." ' Again. In Coatright vs. Coatright, J 53 Iowa, page 57, tbe Court say: i "Where a husband has used his wife's ' money in payment of family expense* < with her consent and without any 1 ~ J UglCflliCUt lu puj UCI) OUC tttUlJUL IC- 1 cover therefor from her husband's ea- -I tate." { In the case of McClure vs. Lancssi ter, 24 8. C.f page 273, it was held by I bis Honor Judge Cothran before f I whom the case was tried, "That where [ husband and wife live together using I the proceeds of her property aa a common means of support, if she does not object to that arrangement, be can ap, propriate it as he pleases, and to his ' own use?there is no resulting trust, and after bis death the wife cannot reI cover?it from his estate." In this , , opinion his Honor was sustained by the Supreme Court on appeal. There are quite a number of other South Carolina caseB in which this ' , principle is enunciated which I might i quote from, but I do not deem it neces> sary to do so. As a conclusion of the matter I f hold: j First. That Mrs. E. A. Haddon, the i claimant, is entitled to recover from I the estate of her deceased husband, T. > L. Haddon, the sum of one thousand I dollars ($1,000.00), being the amount Dargan'sTa] t 1 Mason's Parcelean Lin At less than wholesale prices t 1 quart size GOc dozen ; i galk nro nnt" nont ^heonor fhiin +1 (11 V UV VVli V VUVU|/VI VI b J pint Jellies 2oc dozen, J i SEE OUR t I WE ARE HEADQUARTERS EOR I Spalding's Base Ball ( Ice Cream Freezeri Full line of e ! Dargan's 5 a * ; eceived and had by him as the proeeds of the sale of the tract of land to i. R. Crawford, which was the proprty of tbe paid E. A. Haddon. Second. That Mrs. Haddon is not ntitled to recover from the estate of he said T. L. Haddon the amount laimed that he had received as rents f lands belonging to her. And it is so decreed. R. E. Hill, Judge of Probate. June 4, 1906. Farmers' Educational md Co-operative Union. Communications for tbls column should be ddressed to J. C.8tribllng, Pendleton, 8. C. ^%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% lore About That Farmers' Home Hade Warehoime. The importance of this cotton warelouse business to farmers we think lotifian our devoting considerable paqe on this subject now in order to ;et in shape for a big effort in buildng thesehou8es as soon as the farmers ,re through their crop work. There is no doubt about this, that if ill the loss in weights and damages on otton in one season were bulked in tach cotton county, the loss sustained lere would pay for at least one small warehouse in each important county in be South. Whilst farmers are getting together >n a co-operative plan on the cotton varehoute they are at the same time >ecoming educated of other lines of )usiness; this coming together on this varehouse business will teach farmers low to get better school houses, iburcbesand better roads and mail iacilities, and, above all, it will teach otronorth nnH arm era i um iuud jo u... &T )ower in organized efforts, while inlividual efforts of our strongest men inorganized is nothiDg more than the itruggle of a weakling. We did not state in our other article hat the speculations there given were ockbottom as to the cheapest plans on ill bought material. The prices on cement, for instance, anges in different places all the way rom $1.50 to $2.75 per barrel. Where sement has tc be shipped any considsrable distance over the rail the highest grade cement is the kind to use. Instead of sloping the roof all one yay it is perhaps best to make the ;one or high part in the middle, slopng the roof 50 feet each way. The difference in the insurance rates arill not justify sprinkling or water ank arrangements for lead than a three lection warehouse. Cost of water tank and equipment is ibout $500.00. Additional , cost of Diping for each section added. Where automatic spriDKiiDg arraijgonents are to be used the space above he bales should be at least ODe foot nore than mentioned in our first plans; bat Is, the lowest part of walls should >e nine feet instead of eight feet. Remember, also, that after one secion has been put up that only the jost of one wall?no cost of machine? ias to be paid for each additional secion, the roofing, ends, &c., being the lame on all sections. Crosse & Blackwell's pickles and 3how chow, Lea & Perrin's sauce, Durkee's salad dressing, grated pineapple, lobsters, shrimps, jrabs, French sardines, apricots, iemon cling peaches, and the finest French olive oil, just received by 3, J. Link. To the Triaiera of the Abbeville Baptist Chnreh. Gentlemen:? We take the liberty of lelling you that every church will be given a liberal quantity of L. & M. Paint whenever they paint. 4 gallons L, & M. mixed with 3 gallons Linseed Oil will paint a moderate sized house, Actual cost L. & M. about $1.20 pej gallon, L. & M. Zinc hardens L. & M. Wbit< Lead and makes the paint wear like iron* Largest mills in the world use L. ?S M. Arnold Print Works, North Adams Mass., used neaaly 17,000 gallons L. & M. Paint made with 10,000 gallons L & M. and 7,000 gallons nure Linseet Oil. Sold by P. B. Speed. iid 10c Store. I* HAD YOU RATHER GET a Stove of Enterprise quality, that will stay with you or buy another In a year or two Enterprise Stoves are built to last. o/l Hon TTrnif TQycj LOU X l Uiu o-day : 1 pint size ;")0c dozen ; >n size 80c dozen. These prices hey are sold in Atlanta. pint Jellies 30c dozen. WINDOW. Joods. Hammocks, s, Croquet Sets. Etc. Tin and Enameled Ware. nd 10c Store. NOW I TO SECURE SPECIALL L. V The Sum light, We in % gains QUE ST _ 11 avtrac Waist We h but w and tf We havi and tl of go< Our stoc desire rangir cents Laces ai to see speak L. W. Unknown Friends. There are many people who have j used Chamberlain's Colic, Cholera j and Diarrhoea Remedy with splendid jj results, but who are unbDown because ar they have hesitated about giving a tes- er timonial of their experience for publi- ^ cation. These people, however, are ^ none the less friends of this remedy. ta They have done much toward making ai it a household word by their personal recommendations to friendsand neighbors. It is a good medicine to have in ? the home and is widely known for its a| cures of diarrhoea and all forms of 1 bowel trouble. For sale by C. A. Mil' ford and H. M. Yonng. ? Di HAVE YOU I : TO BUY TI m. ; it fs The school of experience \ taught us, that the best go Our store house Our goods are n< Our reputation i Our motto is "T. Delicious Fruits, V Fancy Gr< To fit the taste of a of all kinds. Buggies and Wa; i e\f +v>a Vioat ttiqItpr at VI bUV WWW M& mm w w est you. 1H BILL Phones 36 and 126. Ma # . C* ' ' 'W' i / > .?. - MKn? IS THE Y GOOD BARGAINS V. Whi iuuah has begun and one w ally suppose business l_ i _ i . _ i . . i dux we ao nox propose 10 n itend to offer from day to day as will keep trade brisk and li M|?T\ is well kept up and * showing the most cc tive line of Goods suitable 1 s and Dresses to be found ave had a phenomenal sale of i e bought very heavily early in le supply is still holding out. I I I I _ f I A/I e never naa sucn a saie ot vvi le main reason is we have the )ds at the right prices. 4 :k of White Lawns is all thad, and we have everything ig in price from five cents tc a yard. nd Embroideries are our specia ; them. We cannot describe t for themselves. WH How to Break up a Cold. It may be a surprise to many to am that a severe cold can be com eteiy broken up in one or two days' me. The first symptoms of a cold e a dry. loud cough, a profuse waty discharge from the noee, and a lin, white coating on the tongue, ^hen Chamberlain's cough remedy is .ben every hour on the first appearice of these symptoms, it counteracts le effect of the cold and restores the astern to a healthy condition within a ay or two. For sale by C. A. Millord ad H. M. Young. Get & box of that Dice paper at Mllford's efore li is all gone. LEARNED IE BEST? | lYS. (rill teach you, as it has j iods are the cheapest. ; is new, 3W, s well known, EE BEST." Dceries n epicure. Confections gons prices that will interi is. in and Trinity Streets. TIME I AT THE STORE OF * 1 ITE.l To tbe Trustees of the AlibeviMe B ap tlst Church. 9 Gentlemen:? We take the liberty of telling you .'jjM that every church will be given a lib- '^aj eral quantity of L. & M. Paint when- ffjiB ever they paint. I 1 4 gallons L. & M. mixed with 3 gal Ions Linseed Oil will paint a moderate' sized house. 1 Actual cost L. & M. about $1.30 perS|?H gai!?& M. Zinc hardens L. & M.White Lead and makes the paint wear like ? iron. Largest mills in the world use L. & Arnold Print Works, North Adams, ;v| Mass,, used nearly 17.0U0 gallons L. & M. Paint made with 10,000 gallons L. & M. and 7,000 gallons pure Linseed ' Sold by P. B. Speed. l>cu(lly Serpent Bites areas common in India as are stomach and liver disorders with us. For the; l/va latter however there is a sure remedy; Electric Bitters; the great restorative \v| medicine, of which S. A. Brown, of liennettsvill^, S. C., says: "They reatored my wife to perfect health, after ylg | years of suffering with dispepsia and a : JpB chronically torpid liver." Electric . .y Bitters cure chills and fever, malaria, >.'' tj biliousness, lame back, kidney troubles ' g and bladder disorders. Sold ou guar- 3 |iutee by P. B. Speed, druggist. Price Local b. I Call for Naber's Ginger Ale. Made by the v X* Abbevl le Boaltng Works. In 5 ct. bottle#. Whon Naber's Glneer Ale and Celery Cola wou't cure your indigestion hunt a doctor quick, fur you are In a bad tlx. What's the good of keeping from him Any good things you may see, That will lift his load of labor Like Rocky Mountain Tea. C. A. Milford. -J Trade Mark? Designs r Vf vn COPYBKiHTS Ac. Anyone sending a sketch and description may quickly ascertain our opinion free whether aa invention is probably patentable. Communications strictly confidential. HAN0B00K on Patents sent free. Oldest agency for securing patents. Patents taken through Munn & Co. receive special notice, without charge, in the Scientific American. A handsomely Illustrated weekly, largest dr- V culation of any scientific Journal. Terms, $3 a year: four months, fL Sold b? all newsdealers. MUNN & Co.36,B">ad?*-New York Branch Office. 625 V St, Washington, D. C. 1 i" .'Zi -/