Cecil v. Cecil

Goldsbgeough, J., delivered the opinion of this Court: The appeal in this case was taken from a judgment of the Orphans’ Court for Baltimore City, upon the petition of the appellants, in which he alleges that the appellees had received from his and their father William Cecil, deceased, the money and other property mentioned in the petition. The appellant insists, that the same was received by the ¹⁵⁶ respective parties by way of advancement, and that they should be compelled to bring this money and property into hotch-pot before their distributive share in the personal estate of their father was assigned to them. The answer of the appellees, Owen Cecil and William Cecil, expressly denies that they received any money of their father as alleged in the petition. The allegation as to these parties being sustained by no evidence whatever, we have no hesitancy in sustaining the judgment of the Orphans’ Court as to them.

Mrs. Harrington and Mrs. Hooper having admitted by their answer, that they had received the money and property charged in the petition; the sole question for us to decide is, whether the money and property was bestowed upon these appellees as an absolute gift or by way of advancement. In the case of Parks vs. Parks, 19 Md. Rep., 323 , the question of advancement came under the consideration of this Court. In that case, the doctrine is recognized and sustained by the authorities cited, that the intention of the donor may he ascertained by parol evidence of the