Smith v. Croom

• Decision Date: 01 January 1857
• Citation: 7 Fla. 81
• Parties: HENRIETTA SMITH, IN HER OWN RIGHT AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF WILLIAM HENRY CROOM, HENRIETTA MARY CROOM AND JUSTINA CROOM, AND ELIZABETH M. ARMISTEAD, APPELLANTS, v. BRYAN CROOM, IN HIS OWN RIGHT AND AS ADM'R. OF HARDY B. CROOM, DEC'D, AND OTHERS, APPELLEES
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

7 Fla. 81

HENRIETTA SMITH, IN HER OWN RIGHT AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF WILLIAM HENRY CROOM, HENRIETTA MARY CROOM AND JUSTINA CROOM, AND ELIZABETH M. ARMISTEAD, APPELLANTS, v. BRYAN CROOM, IN HIS OWN RIGHT AND AS ADM'R. OF HARDY B. CROOM, DEC'D, AND OTHERS, APPELLEES

Supreme Court of Florida

January 1, 1857

Rehearing Denied 7 Fla. 81 at 180.

Appeal from Leon Circuit Court.

This was a bill in chancery, instituted by the appellants as complainants below against the appellees.

Hardy B. Croom and his wife Frances, his daughter Henrietta, his son William and his daughter Justina, all perished by the wreck of the steamboat Home, 9th October, 1837. [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]

Mrs. Frances Croom was the daughter of complainant, Henrietta Smith, and the sister of complainant, Elizabeth Armistead.

If any of the children of Hardy B. Croom survived him, the estate personal of that child or children, by the statute of North Carolina, goes in distribution to the "next of kin" of the child, which is the grandmother, Mrs. Smith, she being the only person then living standing in that degree of relationship to the children. To make the statutes of North Carolina operative upon the estate, the domicil of the child or children must have been in North Carolina. The bill therefore alleges that such was the domicil, and that the children did survive the father, and the personalty is claimed, therefore, for Henrietta Smith as sole distributee. Mrs. Armistead, under the laws of Florida, (which control the real estate in Florida,) would be entitled equally with her mother to a part of the real estate in Florida, she being the aunt of the children of Hardy B. Croom and the only person standing in that degree of relationship on the maternal side--hence Mrs. Armistead is made complainant also.

Hardy B. Croom left several brothers and one sister, all of whose interests are held by Bryan Croom, one of the brothers and defendant to the suit.

Bryan Croom administered on the estate of Hardy (who died intestate,) and qualified as such in Leon county, Florida, where Hardy B. Croom had a plantation and negroes and most of his property. He defends against the complainants' allegations and insists that Hardy B. Croom survived his wife and children, and that therefore he and his brothers and sisters were entitled to the estate by descent and distribution from Hardy, the said Hardy having no child at his death, or father or mother; that such title vests in them whether the domicil were North Carolina or Florida.

He further insists, that even if any child or children of Hardy survived him, the domicil of Hardy, and hence of the children also, was Florida, and that by the act of 1829, the estate, personal as well as real, of an infant intestate would pass to defendants as next of kin of Hardy, through whom the infant derived the inheritance, and that all the children died in infancy.

At a hearing before Judge King, he dismissed the bill, and from this decree the appeal was taken by complainants.

Upon the question of the survivorship of the children of H. B. Croom, the following testimony was read:

Dr. John Torrey, a witness for complainants, states that he knew Mr. Croom since 1833 or '4. Saw him the day he embarked. "I considered Mr. Croom a very feeble man, who might be carried off at any moment by a slight increase of his disease." "On his last visit he was as feeble as I ever saw him," and so likewise "on the morning of his departure." "His constitution was feeble and incapable of enduring much hardship." Mrs. Croom was capable of bearing as much exertion as ladies generally, and the children also.

Dr. Hawkes, another witness for complainants, states that "he knew Mr. Croom first in the winter of 1812, when he went to college. Knew Mrs. Croom since she was a small girl. Saw Mr. Croom two or three days before he left--the state of his health was feeble. Was feeble from the time he first grew up. Was in college with him, studied law together and practiced together--corresponded with him when young men--was the feeblest of all my college acquaintances, and for years past I thought him consumptive. Don't think he could have endured a great deal of fatigue. The daughter and son seemed to be hale and hearty, and as to their capacity to endure fatigue, both had a better constitution in this respect than the father--during the summer before his death, more than once under my own observation, very slight exertion was sufficient to exhaust him."

Dr. McLean, another witness for complainants, states "that he knew H. B. Croom at least 3 years before his death--knew his family--was consulted by Mr. C. professionally during the 3 years--was familiar with the state of his health up to almost the last day before he embarked in the Home; saw him a few days before he embarked. Generally speaking, as a professional man, I considered Mr. Croom as laboring under organic disease of the lungs. Considered Mr. Croom, when I first became acquainted with him, as a man in very delicate health. When I last saw him he was in a state of utter prostration and incapable of much physical exertion beyond a short walk, arising from the disease above already mentioned. On the last visit he made to New York, he was decidedly worse, and as near as I can recollect, up to the time of his embarkation in the Home. My grounds and reasons for these opinions are a critical examination into the symptoms of his complaint, which I considered a disease of the lungs from the commencement. His remarks about his own health were not satisfactory to me; he did not consider his lungs organically diseased, not being willing to admit a pulmonary irritation such as cough, hurried respiration and occasional fever. I saw him repeatedly under the same roof at Saratoga, where I had daily professional intercourse with him for some weeks. During his other visits to New York, I had occasion to see him at my own house and his. He was in a state of utter prostration when I saw him last, which was a few days before he embarked, incapable of any physical exertion beyond that of mere locomotion.

"As far as I was acquainted with his family, each of them possessed more physical power to save themselves from impending danger than he had. The children were in the possession of full health. I cannot speak particularly as to the health of Mrs. Croom, but she appeared to be in ordinary health. The son and daughter of Mr. Croom had physical capacity to encounter the difficulties of the shipwreck which people of their age and health usually have."

The witnesses who were passengers on the "Home," and who knew Mr. Croom, all agree in their testimony that he was in feeble health.

B. B. Hussey, a bookseller and stationer of Charleston, also a witness for complainants, states that he became acquainted with Mr. Croom and family on the boat; was introduced and describes the members of his family, including Mrs. Camak; he says Mr. Croom was feeble and appeared in bad health; the storm was for 36 hours and the boat struck at night; about midnight of 9th October. The passengers began about sunset at the pumps and baling; they were much exhausted and they continued till they found it dangerous to stay below; did not see Mr. Croom thus engaged, although he might have been; they worked in companies and some of the ladies worked.

After the boat struck, he saw many passengers he did not know. Saw H. B. Croom, with a lady on each arm, standing near the main shaft of the engine, in the gangway, with their faces towards the larboard side of the boat and their backs to the engine; behind them was the little boy whose voice he recognized as the son of Mr. Croom, who was crying and calling to his father to save him.

A dim light was in the gangway by which witness could see, though not very distinctly, (speaks positively as to identity of the persons.) When witness saw them the waves had stove in the starboard wheelhouse, and also the paneling that enclosed the engine on the starboard side, and the sea had commenced staving away the panels immediately behind Mr. Croom. Every blow came with tremendous violence and broke away a part of the framework. Before witness left this part of the boat there was no protection from the sweep of the breakers. As the panels had broken in first from the bow, the passengers had retired gradually as far as they could get towards the stern. Here they were hemmed in by fragments of the stern and dining cabin. As the stanchions on the starboard side yielded, the upper deck began to lean downwards and split in pieces. Witness climbed through the seams, and with the assistance of some one below, got his wife through also. Perhaps...