Judges: Campbell
Filed Date: 10/15/1893
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/10/2024
delivered the opinion of the court.
Mr. Vestal,'by his purchase under the deed of trust, became entitled to the income arising from the estate, and it was his duty, while in the enjoyment of the estate, to pay the taxes, and he could not free himself from this obligation by relinquishing to another the land or permitting it to be sold for taxes, and bought by another. It is manifest that, by agreement with Vestal, Robert Minnis purchased the land
We fully concur with counsel for the appellee in their eloquent strictures on the “ married woman’s law,” and its being the prolific source of unnumbered rascalities, duriug the period of evolution, by successive stages from the barbarism of her former condition as a feme covert, to her’ complete emancipation by the code of 1880, but do not feel authorized, because of that, to overturn correct principles of law, in order to prevent what may be a moral wrong. We would gladly seize upon any thing affording a just ground for enforcing the contract originally made between Sevier and Yestal, according to their understanding of it, if we felt justified. McDougal v. Bank, 62 Miss., 663; Cross v. Hedrick, 66 Miss., 61.
Reversed, and remanded for further proceedings in the. chancery court, in accordance with this opinion.