Swearingen v. Taylor

• Citation: 14 Mo. 391
• Parties: SWEARINGEN AND WIFE v. TAYLOR AND WIFE.
• Decision Date: 31 March 1851
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

14 Mo. 391

SWEARINGEN AND WIFE

v.TAYLOR AND WIFE.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1851.

APPEAL FROM ST. LOUIS CIRCUIT COURT.

On the 9th January, 1839, William Christy, of St. Louis, made his will by which he devised to his wife Martha J. Christy for and during her life the two blocks of ground on which he resided with all the buildings for a place of residence for her and any of the testator's children she might choose to live with her. He next beqneathed to his wife for her support and the support and education of his young and unmarried children all “my income of every kind,” with all the slaves which he might own at his death, and he authorized his executors to sell any of the slaves at the request of his wife and supply their places with others more suitable, declaring it to be his will that his wife should be at liberty to bestow his slaves at her death upon any of his children, or make equal division amongst them or otherwise as she might think best, He also bequeathed to his wife “her heirs and assigns forever” all his stock of horses, cattle, &c., all his household and kitchen furniture and provisions which might be on hand at the time of his death; also for her support and the education of his daughter Virginia, all the moneys which might be due him after his debts were paid, and all the rents and proceeds of his property of every description for and during her life. He authorized his executors to sell any of his real-estate for the payment of his debts and to make conveyances for land which he might have sold and not conveyed. He then devises to three of his grand-daughters, children of a deceased daughter, the portion of his real-estate which their mother would have taken if she had lived, and he had died intestate. He next disposes of the remainder in the lots devised to his wife for life and provides for the payment of a sum of money toward the education of a grandson and then directs that his executors shall pay to his daughter Virginia “from the income of my estate” yearly, four hundred dollars “to commence after the death of her mother,” should she be then unmarried and to continue until she was married. The remaining provisions of the will have no bearing upon the present controversy, and are therefore not set out. It appears, however, that the will does not profess to be a disposition of his estate at large, nor to make provision for his children in general. As to the most of his real-estate he died intestate. At the time of the testator's death there were some debts owing to him which were of older date than his will, but to a small amount.

After the making of the will the testator divided a portion of his real-estate near to the city of St. Louis into lots as an addition to the city and sold the lots in the summer of the year 1836, upon the following terms: One-tenth of the purchase-money paid in cash and the balance upon a credit of ____ years the deferred payment bearing interest at ____ per cent. per annum, the interest to be paid annually and the whole secured by deeds of trust upon the property sold, which deeds of trust contained the stipulation that upon a failure to pay the interest as it accrued the property should be sold under the deeds of trust and the whole amount of the unpaid purchase-money and interest should be paid as the principal should become due by the failure to pay the interest. The sale thus made amounted to more than eighty thousand dollars and the securities taken at the sale as well as securities for other indebtedness, came into the hands of the complainant Nathaniel P. Taylor as administrator de bonis non.

Some of the purchasers having failed after the death of the testator to pay the interest upon their notes, the administrator caused the trustees named in the deeds of trust to make sale of lots upon which the money was secured, and in order to prevent a sacrifice of the property and injury to those interested in the money secured upon the lots, the administrator, N. P. Taylor attended the sales and bought in the lots taking the deeds in his own name.

He now files his bill in the Circuit Court of St. Louis county, stating his purchases thus made at the trustees' sale, and that the conveyances were taken in his own name and stating that in consequence of there being different opinions entertained as to the rights of the parties interested in the property thus purchased, as those rights were to be ascertained by the will of the said Christy he was unable to convey the said property purchased by him to any of them with safety. He therefore makes the widow and heirs of Christy parties, and prays the court to determine what parties are equitably entitled to the property, and in what interests, and to direct a conveyance to be made accordingly.

The widow appeared and claimed in her answer that the absolute interest in said property in fee simple, belonged to her under the will of her husband. She states the ground of her claim to be that the whole of the money due upon the notes and deeds of trust were bequeathed to her, and that if it had been paid, she would have been entitled to the whole of it absolutely. She further claims, that as the will gave her the whole of the income of the estate she was entitled to all the interest that had accrued upon the notes up to the time of sale, and that at the sales the purchases were made for sums not exceeding the interest due. She admits that the sales were made at prices far below the value of the property in pursuance of an agreement between the administrator, N. P....