Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/233

SPEIGG V. 8TUMP. 219 �taiB was substantially the same as the Oregon one, (section 6, supra.) �The petition was held sufficient, the court saying (page 383) that it was only necessary to statethe "condition" of the ward's estate so as to enable the court to judge whether a sale was necessary or expe- dient for the purposes permitted. �In this case theverified exhibit or sale bill, filed July 5, 1865, was introduced in evidence by the defendant, upon the theory that, beiug a part of the files of the case when the court granted the license to sell, this court ought to assume that the facts contained in it were known to the county court, and taken into consideration by it in act- ing upon the petition. �From it, it appears that, at the time of the application for license to sell, the personal property belonging to the estate h ad been sold, and that the proceeds, together with the sums collected on debts and rents due the estate, amounted to $1,928.31, and that there had been paid out on account of the estate, not including $632 charged for guardian's services, the sum of $1,819.90. Taking this exhibit as a part of the petition, there can be no doubt but that it appeared there- from that the personal property was exhausted. But in Gregory v. Taber, 19 Cal. 409, it was held that an inventory or other paperon file in the matter of an estate, and not referred to in the petition, could not be considered a part of it. �It may be admitted that the petition in this case did not sufficiently 8et forth the "condition" of the ward's estate, and that it would have been held bad on demurrer. To do this, the petition should have Btated of what the estate consisted, its value, and productiveness, if any. But it is stated that the personal property is not suflScient to pay the expense of supporting Fulton in the asylum, and the amount of this the court judicially knew to be $624 a year until 1865, and $520 a year thereafter. It is also in substance averred that the condition of the estate is such that it is necessary to sell the real property to maintain the ward in the asylum; which, by a reasona- ble if not a necessary implication, amounts to an averment that the income of the property is insufficient for that purpose, and that in addition it will be for the benefit of the ward to convert the land into money and loan it, so far as the proceeds are not necessary for his immediate maintenance. �These allegations, however defective or imperfect, are sufficient, we think, to give the court jurisdiction to make the inquiry. In cflfect it is stated that the condition of the estate is such that the ��� �