The Mississippi Creole. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1841-1851, 1841-07-10

and Tor long time afterwa rds. as vas
well known TO the Sheriff, ample proper
~ TO make the money!
The judgment in the case alluded 70
was rendered for the sum of $50, SO cts. I
An execution issued thereon, and was re-
celved at my Office on the 18th day Of.
June 1910. 1t was, shortly afterwards.
placed IN the hads Of Mr.. Bennett r. Al
len, one OF my deputies.--About six weeks
before the term to which it was returna-
Die Mr.. Allen, as he has informed me.
went to the residence Of Mr.. Westbrook
Tor the purpose Of either getting proper
y or taking forthcoming bond. But.
snort time previous to Mr. Aliens VISIT.
the defendants property was carried or;
and nothing could be found by the depu-
ty on which to levy Nor has anv prop
ty been "ioundn since to lew upon. And
this Is what that vigilant and dutifuT PRO
tector OF the public calls holding up an ex-
Iit!!
IL IS well known 70 the public that shcr-
Ills IN this country are not m the habit
OF levyIng all the executions which they
recel as soon as they may be received
by them, to the great distress ofthe eoun-
try. The law allows them nil the next
court after receiving the executions 70
make the money on them. And much
OF the property that they are compelled
10 sell is exposed to sale during the court
to which the executions are returna BE.
1t is right that II should be 50; for. as there
are more purchasers during the courts
than at any other time. the property
brings better price. The law allows
the sheriff of Madison the two first weeks
OF every term of the court for this pur-
pose. The execution in this case, was
attempted to be levied about tlc0 months
before its return day which was the third
Monday OF the November term. Was
this holding up the execution? Ill had
had cause to suspect that the property
was about to be removed, | wouh have
directed levy to be made as soon a. PES
sible after the receip. of the execution.
But bad no grounds to Justify such sus-
piclon, and therefore did not do il. Or II
the plaintiff or his alto rnev had directed
me to levy as soon as the Fl. Fa. was re-
ceived, would have done so. But no
such directions were given. And was 4
not, therefore, as much the fault of the
plaintiff as the sheriff. When an officer
has some hundreds Of executions IN his
hands at the same time, he cannot make
the money on all Of them in one dav OF
one week, he must have time to discharge
his duties. Aud if a plaintiff has grounds
to believe his debt will be lost unless ex
traordinary diligence is used, it Is his du
ty to inform the sheriff. If the sheriff
after such information, neglects TO dis
charge his duty he becomes liable. Il
this case | had no such information. an
the execution was therefore attended tC
in the usual way.
The meaning of the return on the ex
ecution, ''no property found IS that
when the sheriff endeavored to take thu
property ofthe defendant into possession
under II and sell it to make the money
he could not get hold Of it. He nigh
+, find property in the common sense ofth,
term-for instance he might see or fin,
negro which he knew to be the proper
ty of the defendant, and that negro nigh
give him the dodge, evade MS pursuit. 5,
that he could not get possession Of him. An,
in such case the sheriff might very prop
erly return nuIia bona, or sno property
found" which means simply that he IA
: not been able to get passion OF and SCI
e 1t. If the deputy had, In this case, mad
any other return; if he had returned j
levied, or money made, it would have
then, been a false return. But, as il IS
: the return is in strict accordance wit
the truth.
9 The next charge made against me Is
! that "being thus liable for false rstisr
to the payment ofthe debt and damages.
{ demand Of the money was made BY III
r plaintiffs attorney at November teri
! l840," and that pledged myself to pa
it by the May term 1871, ''if motion lra
not entered against" me; that | failed !
X pay it at the May term although it wa
It twice demanded, shut promised to pay
Immediately after court, either to IN
; plaintiff or myself (meaning J. H. M'Blaii
f. that kneg the suit was for the use
# Murray Lloyd ESQ. that | refused TO pa
i him q. H. McBlair) the money after cou
. and rendered it to Mr. Hargon7 havin
. previously 'Emanaged that Mr.. Hargo
should be alarmed;n that Mr.. Hargon r
fused to receive the money, and that N
tender of 1t to him was mere ''pretenC
to cheat the owner OF his rights
1t is true that promised, at the No'
sr term, opay the money at the May tern
/. But made this promise under the in
Of preston that, under the Circumstances
a. above detailed. was liable. had CO.
c. suited no attorney to know whether vi
- or was not. told Mr. Hargon the plaii
IN tiff at the May term, that having Iarg