Definition
"Substitu" as it appears in Rapalje & Lawrence is an incomplete entry — a fragment truncated at the point of alphabetical transition between entries, capturing the tail end of cross-references under adjacent headings (SUBSTANCE, SUBSTANTIAL) before the volume's text breaks off. It does not constitute a standalone legal term.
The root from which this fragment derives is SUBSTITUTION, a term with several distinct legal meanings:
1. (Wills and Succession) The designation of an alternate beneficiary or legatee to take in place of a named heir or legatee who cannot or does not take — either because the primary beneficiary predeceases the testator, refuses the gift, or is disqualified.
2. (Agency and Contract) The appointment of a substitute agent or delegate, particularly where the original agent lacks authority to delegate and the question arises whether acts of the substitute bind the principal.
3. (Civil Law / Louisiana) A testamentary arrangement directing that property pass from one heir to another in succession — closely related to the fideicommissary substitution of Roman and civil law tradition.
4. (Suretyship) The subrogation or replacement of one party for another in a surety relationship, sometimes called substitution of sureties.
---
Common Confusion
The fragment "SUBSTITU" in Rapalje & Lawrence sits within a cluster of entries for SUBSTANCE and SUBSTANTIAL, not as an independent headword. Researchers encountering this truncation in digitized or reprinted editions may mistake it for a headword. It is not. The substantive treatment of substitution doctrine must be sought under SUBSTITUTION, EXECUTOR AND TRUSTEE, or FIDEICOMMISSARY in the same or companion volumes.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The practical research problem here is twofold.
First, the truncation: Rapalje & Lawrence's entry breaks mid-word at a page or section boundary, a known artifact of the dictionary's original printing and of subsequent digitization. The cross-reference visible in the fragment — pointing toward "SUBSTITUTIONAL" and citing 2 Murph. (N.C.) 320 — suggests the full entry addressed substitutional legacies or substitutional class gifts in wills, a doctrine with significant 19th-century case development particularly in North Carolina and English common law courts. Researchers should not treat the fragment as a complete statement of the law.
Second, the doctrine itself: substitution in wills was a genuinely contested area in 19th-century American and English law, particularly around class gifts — what happens when a will gives property to "a class of persons" and one member of that class predeceases the testator. The fragment's reference to a class gift context ("Where a will contains a gift of property to a class of persons") signals exactly this terrain. Period treatises on wills (Jarman on Wills, Redfield on Wills) address this at length and are the appropriate resources when following leads from Rapalje & Lawrence's truncated entry.
For researchers using Law Mind's corpus: the cases cited in the surrounding entries — 2 Murph. (N.C.) 320, Barn. & Ald. 503, 4 Barn. & C. 473, 3 Car. & P. 513, 1 Moo. & M. 283, 58 Mo. 145 — are real reporters (Murphy's North Carolina Reports, Barnewall & Alderson, Barnewall & Cresswell, Carrington & Payne, Moody & Malkin, Missouri Reports) and should be searchable if those reporters are within the corpus. These cases cluster around patent specification language, pleading in libel, and perjury indictment sufficiency — not substitution doctrine directly — confirming that the SUBSTITU fragment is a transition artifact, not a thematically unified entry.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence does not complete this entry. What the fragment reveals is the dictionary's working method: dense string citations organized by context phrase (e.g., "SUBSTANCE, IN, (in indictment for perjury)" followed by reporter citations), rather than discursive definition. This citation-block format was standard for the period and assumes the reader will proceed directly to the cases rather than rely on the dictionary for doctrinal synthesis.
The adjacent headwords — SUBSTANCE, IN; SUBSTANCE, OTHER; SUBSTANTIAL AND WORKMANLIKE MANNER — suggest the dictionary was organized to capture how courts had defined these terms in specific pleading and contract contexts, not to offer a unified treatment of substantive legal concepts. The transition to SUBSTITU (substitution) follows alphabetically but the text does not survive in the available source.
No other source dictionaries were provided for this entry. Bouvier's Law Dictionary and Black's Law Dictionary (various editions) both carry full entries for SUBSTITUTION and FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTION and are the appropriate supplements when Rapalje & Lawrence's coverage is incomplete.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Substitution doctrine in wills varies significantly between common law and civil law jurisdictions. Louisiana, following civil law tradition, recognizes fideicommissary substitutions with specific statutory constraints. Common law states generally address the same problem through lapse statutes and anti-lapse doctrines rather than through formal substitution rules.
---