TABLE OF CASES.

Abercrombie et als. and Beattie, adm. 9 Cawley and Williams,

Adams and Davis,
Adams v. McKenzie,

Aday v. Echols, adm'r, et als.,
Adkins and White,

Alexander v. Fisher & Wife,
Andress v. Roberts,

Armistead, ex'r, and Maulden, Mon-
tague & Co.,

Bagby, use &c. v. Baker et als.

206

264 Centreville Br. Co. and The State, 678
698 Chastang's Heirs and Baker et al. 417
353 Clarke & Peck and Braley,
636 Clealand v. Huey et al.

436

348

374 Clements et als. and Dunlap,
387 Cobb and Foote & Wife,

778

585

500 Executor,

479

Cochran & Estill and Cunningham's

658 Colomb & Iselin v. Br. B'k Mobile, 454 Baker et al. v. Chastang's Heirs, 417 Commissioners' Court and Long, 482 Bank, Br. Mobile & Colomb & Iselin, 454 Commissioners' Court v. Thompson, 694

Beattie, adm'r, v. Abercrombie et als. 9 Davidson and Moore & Jones,adm'rs 209

117 Davis et al. and McKissack et al. 315535 Davis and Long, adm'r,

801

Beroujon and Strong,

168 Dial v. Hair et al.

798

Betts et al. v. Betts,

Billingsley et al. and Harris et al.438 Drake v. Moore,

597

Bisquay, adm'r, and Camack,
Blount and Foster,

Bobe, adm'r, v. Frowner & Wife,
Bostwick & Kirkland v. Beach,
Braley v. Clark & Peck,

Brantley and Witherington, adm'r,
Brazier & Co. v. Burt,
Briggs and Faver & Mount,
Brown and Haden et al.
Brown and Whitehead,
Brown and Steele,
Burt and Brazier & Co.
Burton et al. v. Holly,
Bush et al. v. The State,
Calvert v. Marlow,
Calvert, adm'r, and Wilson,
Camack v. Bisquay, adm'r,
Carpenter & Wife v. Hall et als.
Caskey et als. and Dixon,

Gibson v. Wilson,

Gilbert and Myers,

Glassell and Waddell,
Glover v Glover,
Gould v. Hill,
Gould v. Hill,

Governor and Payne et als.
Governor and Evans et als.
Governor and White et als.
Graham v. Nesmith et al.
Graham and Perry,

84 Lyon & Baker and Swilley & Riley, 552
457 Lyon et al. and Worthy et al.
320 Magee and Tucker & Wife,
659 Malempre and Etheridge,
767 Marlow and Calvert,

763 Marsh and Forward et al.
822 Martin, ex'r, v. Williams, adm'r,

784

99

565

67

645

190

Green, adm'r, and Ramey et als. 771 Martin's Ex'rs v. Smith et al. 819

214 698

315 576 229

214

241

Hall et als. and Carpenter & Wife, 439 McDade et al., admʼrs, v. Mead,
Hannah and Ross,
125 McKenzie and Adams,
Hargrove et al. and Duncan, adm'r, 77 McKissack et al. v. Davis et al.
Harris et al. v. Billingsley et al. 438 McMaken et al. v. McMaken,
Harrison and Pool,

Harwell and Townsend & Bro.
Henderson v. Plumb & Robbins,
Henderson and Moore & Jones,adm's
Hill and Gould,
Hill and Gould,
Hirschfelder v. The State,
Hodnett et al and Pool, adm'r,
Holly and Burton et al.
Hooks v. Smith et al.

Hooks et al v. Br. Bank Mont'gy,
Hooper v. Edwards,

Hopper, adm'r, v. McWhorter,
Hopper, adm'r, v. Steele,

514 McWhorter and Hopper, adm'r,
301 Mead and McDade et al., adm'rs,
74 Mervine v. Parker,

Hoskins and Jones' Ex'rs,

Howze and Lockett,

Jones v. Jones,

Hoyt, Ford & Robinson v. Murphy, 316 Morris aud Spivy,

Huey et al., adm'rs, and Clealand,
Hullum v. The State Bank,

Jones' Ex'rs v. Hoskins,

Jones and Stokes,

Judge Co. Court Pike and Wilson, 757 Nicholson v. The State,

Perry and Dupree,

Perry v. Graham,
Phillips v. Poindexter,

Plumb & Robbins and Henderson,
Pool v. Harrison,

Pool, adm'r, v. Hodnett et al.
Pope v. Welch, adm'r,
Price et als. v. Talley's Adm'rs,
Price, adm'r, and Simmons, adm'r.
Pryor and Newman, ex'r,
Ramey et als. v. Green, adm'r,
Randolph and Gardner,
Read v. Walker,
Richardson and The State,
Ridgway and Beall & Co.,
Rives v. Parmley,
Roberson and Ware,
Robertson v. Smith,
Roberts and Andress,
Roland v. Logan, ex'r,
Ross v. Hannah,
Bowland and Smith,
Rowland v. Walker,

Sankey's Dis'ts v. Sankey's Ex'rs,
Seawell and The State Bank,
Shackelford v. Miller et al.
Shaw v. The State,

Shorter's Adm'r v. Mims et als.
Simmons adm'r, v. Price, adm'r,
Simmons & Wife v. Walker, use, &c.,
Sims & Jones v. Knox,
Smith v. Mundy,
Smith and Robertson,
Smith et al. and Hooks,
Smith v. Rowland,

46 and Felix, a slave,
and Murray,

579 Steele v. Brown,

74 Steele, adm'r, and Knox's Dist's.
514 Steele and Hopper, adm'r,
752 Stevens and King,
631 Stiff, Ex parte,

21 Stokes v. Jones,

405 Strong v. Beroujon,

186 Sturtevant and Mims' Ex'rs,

720

727

700

815

828

475

464

734

168

359

21

771 Swilley & Riley v. Lyon & Baker, 552
685 Talley's Adm'rs, and Price et als.
323 Tart and Barron, adm'r,
109 Thompson v. Gates,

117 Thompson et al. and Matlock,

668

32

600

256 Thompson and The Comm'rs Court, 694 105 Thorn and Otis et al.

616 Walker and Read,

675 Walker and Simmons & Wife,
547 Walker and Rowland,
655 Wallis et als. and Moore,
405 Ware v. Roberson,
664 Weaver et al. and The State,
236 Webb and Cook & Hardy,
182 Welsh, adm'r, and Pope,
220 White v. Adkins,

395

323

664

749

458

105

293

810

631

636

338 White et al. v. The Governor,
665 Whitehead v. Brown,

767

682

819 Whitfield and Cox, adm'r,

738

254 Wilkinson v. Moseley,

288

382 Williams, adm'r, and Martin, ex'r, 190 263 Williams v. Cawley,

206

400 Williams and Nelms,

650

109 Williamson & Wife v. Mason, adm'x, 87 112 Wilson and Gibson,

68

119 Wilson v. Knight, Guard.,
276 Wilson's Heirs v Wilson's Adm'r,

129

176

66

and Nicholson,

66 and Moore,

and Crow,

541 Wright, adm'r, v. Lewis,

194

547 Zunts and Sprague & Winston,

382

Y. Centreville Br. S'o.,

678.

Smith et als. v. Martin's Ex'rs,
Spivey v. Morris,

Sprague & Winston v. Zunts,
Stallworth, ex'r, and Kennedy,
Standefer et al. and Ewing,
State v. Richardson,

and Hirschfelder,
and Batre,

ERRATA.

In 2d line from bottom, page 158, for married, read named.

In 17th line from top, p. 161, after the word that, read the estate.

For the correction of error in 1st head-note, p. 209, see Index, Title, DiscoxTINUANCE 1.

In first line of 3d head-note, p. 280, strike out the word can.

In 25th line from the top, p. 551, for court, read count.

In 8th and 9th lines of 1st head-note, p. 700, for surety, where it occurs in each, read security

For correction of error in 3d head-note, p. 771, see Index, Title, CHANCERY PLEADING AND PRACTICE 17.

NOTE. After the delivery of the opinion in the case of Hopper, adm'r, v. Steele, p. 828, a re-hearing was granted, and the writ of error subsequently dismissed, but the opinion, not having been withdrawn, was placed in the hands of the Reporter, and has thus gotten into this volume. It is consequently not to be regarded an an authoritative decision.-REPORTER.