APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 
went to pieces. The bodies of 
Taylor and his wife were found 
close together, and it further ap- 
peared that she was a woman of 
a very robust constitution, and in 
the habit of enduring great fa- 
tigue by her management of the 
officers’ mess, as well as that of a 
great many of the soldiers, whilst 
he was rather sickly, and had 
been latterly much afflicted with 
an asthma. 
_ It was contended on the part of 
the husband’s next of kin, that 
by the principles of the Roman 
civil law, which had been adopted 
into the law of this country, and 
were in fact the only principles 
governing a case of this kind, it 
was laid down that where two 
persons perished together in a 
common calamity, and it became 
a question which of the two was 
the survivor, the presumption of 
law should always be in favour 
of the person possessing the more 
robust constitution and greater 
strength, as being thereby the bet- 
ter fitted to struggle with the dif- 
ficulties of his situation, and re- 
sist for a longer time the opera- 
tion of death. Thus where the 
father and son shall perish toge- 
ther, the presumption of survi- 
vorship is in favour of the son, 
if above the age of puberty, but 
of the father if under; the same 
as to a mother and daughter; and 
_as to husband and wife, the pre- 
sumption is in favour of the hus- 
band. This, however, iike all 
other legal presumptions, was lia- 
_ble to be repelled by evidence to 
-the contrary; but in this case it 
- was contended, from the situation 
of the wife at the time the acci- 
dent happened, it was most pro- 
-bable that she had perished be- 
fore her husband descended to her 
Vor. LVII, 
273 
rescue. Upon both grounds, 
therefore, of principle, and of 
fact, the Court must conclude, that 
the husband was the survivor, and 
accordingly grant the administra- 
tion to the next of kin, 
On the part of the wife’s next 
of kin, it was contended, that the 
presumption of law alluded to 
was only applicable to cases 
where .parties perish together, in 
such a manner as to preclude the 
possibility of obtaining any evi- 
dence as to which of them was 
the survivor, Where, however, 
evidence as to that fact was pro- 
duced, as in the present case, the 
case must be decided upon that 
evidence only. Hereit appeared 
that the parties had perished by 
the same accident, and their bo= 
dies were afterwards found toge- 
ther, and that the common course 
of nature had, in this instance, 
been inverted by the wife being 
the more strong and robust of 
the two. The court must, there- 
fore, necessarily conclude that 
she was the survivor, and accord- 
ingly grant the administration of 
her husband’s effects to her re- 
presentatives. 
Sir Joun NicHoL. observed, 
that this case presented itself for 
decision under very singular cir- 
cumstances. He _ recapitulated 
them, and observed, that the ques- 
tion as to the administration had 
not been gone into; but that with 
respect to the general administra- 
tion, the counsel had argued upon 
the legal presumption of survis 
vorship, and whether or not that 
presumption was sufficiently re- 
pelled by the facts in evidence. 
He agreed in the doctrine, that 
had been laid down, of the pre- 
sumption being in favour of the 
husband, but it was a necessary 
yj 
