|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WILLIAMS' CASE. 281
pears from all that has been said, that a great variety and repeated
efforts have been made, as well by the Legislature as by the judi-
ciary, to fix upon some general rule by which the present value of
a life interest might be ascertained; and by which the proper pro-
portions between such interests and the perpetual right, or estate
of inheritance might be adjusted and determined. Much light has
been thrown upon the subject, and some difficulties have been
removed; but that rational degree of certainty, which is, in all
respects, so desirable, has not yet been attained. The rules which
have been laid down or adopted, in relation to this matter, are
manifestly defective, erroneous, and unjust. They are so contra-
dictory as to be utterly irreconcilable by any ingenuity or argu-
ment; and yet being rules laid down by the Legislature, or ap-
proved by the Court of Appeals this court cannot, as in some other
cases, make an election to follow any one in preference to another
of them; or adopt any new general rules applicable to the same
and all other similar estates, which should more nearly coincide
with reason and justice, (c) The subject can now only be extri-
cated from the difficulties in which it has been involved by the
Legislature.
The legislative rule, now in force in regard to dower, directs
that where lands are sold for the benefit of infants, as in this in-
stance; (d) or where the real estate is sold to save the per-
sonalty; (e) or where the real estate of an intestate is sold under
the act to direct descents, (f) no more than a seventh nor less
than a tenth of the net proceeds of the whole estate shall be
awarded to the widow in lieu of her dower. But in regard to
tenants by the courtesy and other tenants for life in real estate the
matter has been expressly referred entirely to the discretion of the
court to say what proportion of the whole net proceeds of sale
should be awarded to them in lieu of their estates, (g)
As to all cases of dower, not embraced by the legislative rule,
this court is governed by its own rule; which as it now stands,
directs, that, 'the allowance to a healthy woman in lieu of her
right of dower in land sold under decrees, to be as follows: If
under thirty years of age, one-sixth; if above thirty and under
thirty-six, two-thirteenths; if above thirty-five and under forty,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(c) Higgs v. Warry, 6 T. R. 655; The Mayor of Southampton v. Graves, 8 T. R.
502.—(d) 1816, ch. 154, s. 10.—(e) 1810, ch. 193, s. 8; 1819, ch. 148.-(f) 1820,
191, s. 28.—(g) 1816, ch. 154, s. 13; 1820, ch. 191, s. 35, 36, 37 and 38.
36 V.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
