Iowa territorial gazette and advertiser. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa Territory [Iowa]) 1840-1846, 1843-03-18
CONSTlTUTlONALlTY OF STAY
AND VALUATION LAWS.

During tho past week, the question as
to tho Cons,;tu,ionali,v Of the Stsv or
Valuation law, passed by the Legislative
Assembly Of this Territory, at their last
session, was brought before his Honor
Judge Mason, in the following manner:
The Sheriff in obedience to a writ ofexe-
cu,ion issued from the common.law side
oil the District, Court, had levied upon GER
tain personal property belonging to the
defendant in execution. The property
was appraised agreeab'y with the rrovis-
ions Of the above law, and was offered at
public sale Cor lwo.thirds its appraised
value. No bid being made. the property
was offered 10 the plaintiff al that value
Ii. e. two.thirds) in satisfaction of his
debt, and was refused by him. The
sheriff then returned tho execution with
un endorsement Of his proceedings there
on, upon whichD motion was made by the
counsel for Tie plaintiff for an a,ias writ
OF execution, which included motion to
quash the proceedings Of the Sheriff. The
ground Oil which the motion was based,
was, that the law under which the Sher.
if had proceeded, was unconstitutional.
] The question thus coming up was argued
with ability by number OF The members
OF the bar. Those in the affirmative took
the position, that the law was retrospcc
tive in !ts operation and,consequently ina
paired the obligation Of contracts, and al
so that the law made property legal
tender while the constitution made gold
and silver only sach tender. Those in
the negative took the position that the
law was remedial i'll its nature. and that
the remedy was no part o; :he obligation
Of Il contract, and consequently that this
law could not effect that obligation
Judge Mason decided that so Far as the
law relates TO proceedings on a judgment
obtained upon simple contract, IT WAS
lcoNsr,rurloNAL The Judge, however
in,na,ed that the case would be d,1eren
in regard to sale under foreclosure q
mortgage, or II deed ottrust.
j Upon the suhjec: of the eonsti,utionalit!
" SucE lhNS, u QcSiSlVu .iiNSs UcCl1 - ScuNs }
made by the Supreme Court-of,he Uni
, ted States, which has been understood By
many 10 cover the whole Of the provis
ions Of our law; and that Is, that suci
J laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. This how
ever is not tho case. and the following
brief report given by the National Intel
igencer shows, that it only reaches .
case where sale was made under ,
mortgage containing a special power o
sale, and that in such case tho law is ia
Applicable, and it made to cover such cas-
cs is unconstitutional:
/ SUPREME COURT OF Tue UNITED STATES
IuusDAY. FEsRuARY -. ls4s.
No. So. Arthur Ercnaon. con,psiHaHt. Is. John
III. kinze ct al certificate OF division IN Opn
ion between the Judges Of the Circuit Court OF the
United States for Illinois. Mr. Chief Ju.,cs TAN
Ef a. !lvered the opinion Of this Court lst. That
til. decree int!i!s should rects the premises
to be so!d at pubc auction 10 the hsghest bidder
wthon, regard to the Law of the State Of the 18th
Of February. Sll. which gives the right 0fredenIp'
ton TO tie mortgage for twtaysinonss, mud to the
I judgment creditor tor fifteen months. I'D. That
the decree should dissclthe-saie OF the norigaged
premises without being drst v.lued BY ,hsss house.
h,!ders, aud withaar-reqairins two TIN ~ of the
| amount OF the said valuation TO be 40 according ia
| The Law OF February 81. 1871.
-