Hill v. Hill

Bartol, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The real estate of Stephen A. Hill, deceased, was sold under a decree passed by the Orphans’ Court of Cecil County, under the Acts of 1865, ch. 162, and 1866, ch. 81, for the payment of his debts. Among the claims filed, was that of the appellant, his widow; being an account charging for cash lent by her to her husband, during the coverture, “for the purpose of purchasing land from Silas Low, and for materials for ¹⁸⁴ building the house thereon,” and which is stated in the account to be money she received from C. B. Cutler, her guardian.” Exceptions to the allowance of the account were filed by the appellee, a creditor of the deceased ; and upon proof being taken, the claim was disallowed. We think the decision of the Orphans’.

Court was correct, the evidence being in our opinion, altogether insufficient to establish the claim. It does not appear when the parties were married, nor at what time the appellant became entitled to the money, which she alleges was loaned to her husband; we are left to infer, that she held It as her separate property, under Art. 45, secs. 1 and 2, of the Code. There is no proof whatever, that it was loaned to her husband upon any contract or promise on his part to repay it. The witness Cutler states that he was her guardian, and had in his hands $412.96, belonging to her, of this sum he paid her $200 in the spring of 1866, and shortly thereafter, $100 more; and on the 23rd day of June, 1866, the balance, $119, was paid to her husband.

The presumption is, that this payment was made with the knowledge and acquiescence of the appellant, nothing appearing to the contrary; and a release was executed by her to the guardian. The witness further states, that at the time the balance of the money, $119, was paid to Stephen, he said “he wanted the money to pay for a lot of ground he had bought,” and further said, “he had sold or could sell his horse, and with that money, and other money he could get, would pay for that lot of ground,” and told witness, “he intended to deed the property to his wife, and asked witness if he would take the deed down to Elkton to have it recorded.” The witness Warner, states that the deceased told him he had over $400 of his wife’s which he was going to pay for the piece of land, and had some hundred dollars to put into the