Lewis v. Hudson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ of error to the Court of Chancery for R assell county. The complainants filed their original, and an amended and supplemental bill against the defendants, Jonathan A. and Cranberry Hudson, setting forth that Anderson Abercrombie, of the State of Georgia, did, on the-day of July, 1831, convey to Charles Abercrombie sundry slaves, (whose names are particularly mentioned.) “To have and to hold to him, upon trust and confidence, to receive and pay the rents and hire thereof…
Read the full summary
Writ of error to the Court of Chancery for R assell county. The complainants filed their original, and an amended and supplemental bill against the defendants, Jonathan A. and Cranberry Hudson, setting forth that Anderson Abercrombie, of the State of Georgia, did, on the-day of July, 1831, convey to Charles Abercrombie sundry slaves, (whose names are particularly mentioned.) “To have and to hold to him, upon trust and confidence, to receive and pay the rents and hire thereof to Martha E. Abercrombie, to her sole and separate use, independent of the control of her intended husband, and during…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
It is perfectly clear, that the deed, by which the slaves in question were conveyed by Anderson Aber-crombie in trust for Martha E., created an estate to her sole and separate, use; in fact, it asserts, in terms most explicit, that such was the intention of the donor. This being the case, it was competent for her to d.spose of them by will. [Henly v. Philips, 2 Atk. Rep. 49; Ross v. Ewer, 3 id. 160; 3 Bro. C. C. 8.] In Rich *466v. Cockel, [9 Ves. Rep. 369,] the instrument expressed a trust for the separate use of the wife, without adding any power of disposition by deed, will or other writing.…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Amos v. ToolenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
- Bethea v. BetheaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Lyde v. TaylorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850
- Catterlin v. HardySupreme Court of Alabama · 1846