
    WAPLES v. HALL et al.
    Court of Common Pleas. Sussex.
    November, 1798.
    
      Bayard’s Notebook, 234.
      
    
    Burton Waples, the grandfather of the plaintiff,
    by his last will devised certain lands to the plaintiff and appointed the wives of the defendants executrices of his will. The testator died while the corn etc. were growing upon the lands devised to the plaintiff. The com etc. were taken by the defendants.
    
      Wilson, for the plaintiff,
    contended that the emblements passed by the devise and cited Cro.Eliz. 61, 2 Com.Dig. 142, Co.Litt. 55b note.
    
      Ridgely and Bayard, for defendants,
    admitted the law was as contended in England but argued that it was against the entire system of the law on the subject in this state and also against the practice. That not only the emblements, but the lands themselves as chattels, in the first instance went to the executors for the payment of debts.
    
      
       This ease is also reported in Wilson’s Red Book, 217, Rodney’s Notes, Nov. 22, 1798.
    
   But the Court held that the laiids passed to the devisee by the will and also the emblements, and that the executors had no right to take the com growing at the time of the testator’s death.

Verdict for plaintiff.

Note. The defendants obtained a role to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside upon a misdirection of the Court.  