Mr. SANDS. Where there is none appointed
by last will and testament.
Mr. PUGH. That is what I said.
Mr. SANDS. I go farther and say that even
where, by virtue of his office, the executor is
guardian of the minor heir, it is only for
three years, and after that period the minor is
without a guardian, unless one is appointed
by the orphans' court.
Mr. PUGH. I never said he was so forever ;
but only that be was so.
Mr. SANDS. There was no limitation to
the expression of the gentleman. The legal
construction of his statement would be that
the executor was guardian forever.
Mr. ABBOTT. Does not the latter portion
of that section provide for all that ?
Mr. SANDS. I tell you non-professional
gentleman that your interests are vastly more
at stake in this matter than those of the law-
yers, although I am an humble member of
that much abused fraternity. Your interests
are at stake instead of mine. For if this sec-
tion is adopted, where I now have one case
going to the court of appeals from the
orphans' court, I should then have a dozen.
But the people who are not lawyers, and who
would be put into the hands of men not law-
yers to decide law issues, would be the sole
sufferers.
make these remarks to show that we
might go to gentlemen of high intelligence in
the orphans' court, and ask them to decide
questions of law, and then we should have to
go into the court-house to have their deci-
sions reviewed and corrected. It is a most
dangerous thing, and one that will be fraught
with evil consequences, to put men not law-
yers to decide law issues.
The question recurred upon the motion of
Mr. DAVIS, of Washington, to amend the
amendment of Mr. THOMAS, by striking out
the words " one thousand" and inserting the
words '' three thousand" as. the limit of the
jurisdiction of the orphans' court over the
real estate of deceased parties.
Mr. SWOPE called the yeas. and nays on this
question, which were ordered.
The question was then taken, by yeas and
nays, and resulted—yeas 28, nays 41—as fol-
lows :
Yeas—Messrs. Annan, Audoun, Crown,
Carter, Cunningham, Davis, of Washington,
Dellinger, Dennis, Ecker, Gale, Hatch, Hop-
per, Johnson, Keefer, Markey, Mayhugh, Mc-
Comas, Nyman, Pugh, Robinette, Russell,
Schlosser, Smith, of Dorchester, Sneary,
Swope, Sykes, Todd, Wickard—28. '
Nays—Messrs. Goldsborough, President ;
Abbott, Billingsley, Blackiston, Briscoe,
Chambers, Cushing, Daniel, Dent, Duvall,
Edelen, Farrow, Galloway, Greene, Hebb,
Hoffman, Hollyday, Hopkins, Horsey, Ken-
nard, King, Lansdale, Larsh, Mitchell, Miller,
Morgan, Murray, Negley, Parker, Parran,
Peter, Purnell, Ridgely, Sands, Schley, |
Smith, of Carroll, Stirling, Thomas, Thrus-
ton, Wilmer, Wooden—41.
The amendment to the amendment was ac-
cordingly rejected.
Mr. CUSHING, when his name was called,
said: I am willing to vote for the proposition
allowing the orphans' court jurisdiction to
the amount of one thousand dollars. But 1
am not willing to increase that amount, be-
cause it strikes me, though not a lawyer, that
there will come up before the orphans' court
questions concerning real estate that may be
very embarrassing, and which in the end will
lead to great litigation. I am willing to vote
for one thousand dollars, to meet cases in-
volving, small estates. But where larger es-
tates are involved, I think questions will
arise which will govern the action of the
other court. I therefore vote "no."
The question then recurred upon the amend-
ment of Mr. THOMAS, to insert after, the words
"real estate of deceased persons" in the
twenty-fifth section of the report, the words
"not to exceed the value of one thousand
dollars." •
Upon this question Mr. WOODEN called for
the yeas and nays, and they were ordered.
' The question was then taken, by yeas and
nays, and resulted—yeas 46, nays 26—as fol-
lows:
Yea»—Messrs. Goldsborough, President ;
Annan, Belt, Billingsley, Blackiston, Brooks,
Brown, Chambers, Cunningham, Cushing,
Daniel, Dellinger, Dent, Duvall, Ecker, Ede-
len, Farrow, Galloway, Greene, Hebb, Henkle,
Hoffman, Hollyday, Hopkins, Hopper, Horsey,
Kennard, Lansdale, Larsh, McComas, Mitch-
ell, Morgan, Negley, Parran, Purnell, Robi-
nette, Russell, Sands, Schley. Smith, of Car-
roll, Sneary, Swope, Sykes, Thomas, Wilmer,
Wooden—46.
Nays—Messrs. Abbott,' Audoun, Briscoe,
Carter, •Davis, of Washington, Dennis, Gale,
Hatch, Johnson, Keefer, King, Markey, Mil-
ler, Murray, Nyman, Parker, Peter, Pugh,
Ridgely, Schlosser, Smith, of Dorchester,
Stirling, Thruston, Todd, Turner, Wickard
—26.
The amendment was accordingly adopted.
Pending the call of the yeas and nays, the
following explanations were made by mem-
bers, when their names were called:
Mr. ABBOTT, Believing that the people are
fully competent to select such men as they
choose to transact their business, and being
opposed to putting any limit upon them in
that respect, I vote " no."
Mr. CHAMBERS. I do not think this or-
phans' court is the jurisdiction by which this
real estate should be administered. I think:
it is altogether foreign to its character and
mode of doing business. But I shall vote
"aye" upon this proposition, upon the prin-
ciple that the less mischief done the better.
Mr. PUGH. I shall vote against this propo-
sition for reasons I have already stated. If |
