
    Merrils v. Adams.
    The statute granting appeals from courts of probate, limits t!o eighteen months, without any saving ior feme coverts.
    
    Abel' Merrils made his last will and testament, devising and bequeathing all his estate, real and personal, to Mary his wife, except a small residuum to his brothers and sisters; and appointed his wife sole executrix. — ■ He died, and probate of his will was made the 3d day of April, 1776.— On the 20th day of September, 1786, motion was made to the Court of Probate for an appeal, and the following reasons shown, viz. “ Seth Merrils, of New Hartford, now appears in court, and shows — that he is son and heir of Susanna Merrils, late of said New Hartford, deceased; wbicb said Susanna was sister, and heir of Abel Merrils, formerly of said New Hartford, now deceased. And tbe said Susanna, at tbe time of tbe death of said Abel, was a feme covert, and so continued until tbe time of ber death, wbicb happened on tbe 25th day of February, 1786: And thereupon moves this court for liberty to appeal from tbe decree of this court, approving tbe last will and testament of said Abel; and now here offers in court good and sufficient bail.”
    Tbe Court of Probate granted an appeal to tbe Superior Court, and tbe appellee pleaded in abatement thereof, tbe following plea, viz. And now William Adams, tbe appellee, and only heir-at-law of Mary Merrils, alias Mary Kellogg, late deceased, tbe late wife of tbe said Abel Merrils, deceased, named 'in said last will comes before this' court, and pleads and says — that said appeal, now taken from tbe probate of said will, ought to abate, and be dismissed, and be not bolden to answer thereto.
    For that be says, said Susanna was of full age at tbe time of tbe death of said testator, and probate of said will, and more than ten years bath since elapsed; and that she bad full notice of tbe probate thereof: And therefore tbe said Seth bath no right by law to an appeal from tbe sentence and decree of said Court of Probate, in approving said will, said coverture notwithstanding. , Tbe said Susanna, and all other tbe brothers and sisters of tbe said testator, being inhabitants of this state at tbe time of said sentence, and have acquiesced therein for more than ten years last past.
    Tbe plea in abatement ruled sufficient.
   By the whole Court.

Tbe statute granting appeals from tbe courts of probate, limits them to eighteen months, with a saving for minors, till they arrive at full age, and for persons in foreign parts, until they return; but has no special saving for feme eovcrlsj nor do they come fully within the reasons of the other savings. Coverture may be of sixty or eighty years continuance, and it would be very inconvenient that estates should remain so long unsettled. And besides, a feme covert always hath a person to act for her, who is supposed to be friendly to her interests, and capable to manage them, and hath an interest of his own coupled therewith. Liberty of appeal, like that of bringing error, is but an indulgence, further to controvert a matter once adjudged; and' as it cannot be extended to feme coverts, through the whole term of their coverture, without manifest inconvenience, and the statute has no express provision therefor, we are not to suppose it to have been within the intent of the legislature that it should thus extend: Therefore, the appeal in this case does not lie.

This judgment was afterward affirmed in the Supreme Court of Errors.  