Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1843-06-10
THE ELIEF Tvs.
Important 10 Iadira. The late Decision of The
T. S Court.

Important 10 Iadi,u,a. The late Decision of the
Z. 5. Court.
At the late session Of the Circuit Court of lie
United States this Cry the effect OF the decls-
Of the S1premeCourt of The L. States IN case
Of Bronson .. S hms-e became the subject OF legal
discussion and adjudication.
The question presented 10 several suits in
Chancery 10 forectose mortgages and 10 the eject
ment suit Of Doe GaatIey. In the mortgage
the deeds had been executed various dates,
from I.3 10 / : II nod ia Doe Gdntiey decree
on mortgage was IN ade before. and the sale after
the aPpraIaement law OF 1911 became the Jaw Of
the land
SAMUEL JUDAu ESD. Of Knox happening in
Court when the question was made, expressed
hIs desire TO be heard 90 the subject defence
OF the Bar, although, personally, not interested
IN the cases. Mr.. JUDAH, with great praisewor
!hiness, urged that the matter too important
to the People Of the State Of Indiana he suffered
10 60 by default. Judge MCLEAN, with that regard
Tor the investigation Of Truth, which, under all
circumstances, emineauy characterses him,
observed that 1t would be his duty 10 give effect
10 the decision of The Supreme Court far as Il
might Apply as authority, but that he should not
carry that decision further and expressed his vii
lingness to have the mortgages N Indiana dis;ln-
guished from the mortgages IN Illinois.
On motion fJr a new trial IN tho eIectment
suit, arguments were made. Mr. juan address
sed the Court With his well known ability, aud
authority. contendei that II did apply to mort.
cages in Indiana. This argument Mr.. JUDAH
based upon the following striking points:
|. That dy the Lac Of fsdaaa. as i, had al
rays been from the settlement Of Tie country, mort
gagged lands ,rten sold, 1rcrc to DC sold as other
lands are SOLD on execution
ii. That it is uairerSdl rule that 6recmion
sales must be gorerned by the lar IN force attic
time Of the sale.
The Court did not decide the question: but,
upon difference Of opinion, the Cause was GER
titled to The Y. S Supreme Court for Its determln
alton.
An important state of facts is hero presented
for tho Consideration of our People. An opportu.
nifty is now offered for reconsideration of the
case OF Bronson, and to determine the affect o.
that case upon Statute. The Importance o.
this question TO Indiana IS surely sufficiently alb
sorhIng, to interest our People IN seeing tina
,, tho alluded to is defended at Washington by
counsel conVersant with Indiana Law, and VIII
may be able 10 enforce II with ability. Doc L
GaHttcy should not be permitted TO 60 TO court .
, bronson rs htH-ie went-wIihout counsel TO sus
tain the legislation of the State. 1t is not howev
er, TO be expected that individuals oppressed wit
J debt will be able to employ counsel at Washing
ton. We suggest therefore the proprIety, IN thi
matter of general interest, that counsel be retaine
at the expense Of the State. IL our legislation
worthy Of money to enact Ii Is worthy OF none
to be sustained.
On the Bills 10 fDfeclose, the Court decreed tn
: sales Of the mortgaged lands to be made accordin
, to the law in force al the time that the mortgaa
, es were severally made. The Court also altere
, the rule adopting tho State relief laws So as
!, | except mortgage cases. Bot Understand thu
= 10 all actions law the apprlisement and oihe
: | relief laws ore followed by the Court.
! 10 the Supreme Court of this State no decisi
: decisive as 10 their construction Of the effect
. the Bronson case has been given. 1t Is easy
q perceive tina, the leaning Of The Cour, aud b
y / is decidedly against the doctrines of tba, cas-
= and that will only be taken authority in case
: strictly within the rule Ind. State Journal