Iowa territorial gazette and advertiser. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa Territory [Iowa]) 1840-1846, 1844-04-27

fully settled ia the case Of Bronson vs.
K nzie, icci . ! at the last term. I. ti4w.
Sill, that nothing reHams to be add d 70
the reasoning o, the court, Or requires
reference Ia any o'hrr authority, than
what ia therein referred 70; il is, how
ever. not to bs understood that BY that, or
any former decision OF this court, al
State l-gi la,inn N ex,s,itg contracts Is
r, pugnanl To the coas,ru ion. "a
I'll IS within the un.loub I'd awcr OF
State Legis a,ures to pass recording acts.
BY which tln ".der gre ntec shalt b. ros,.
poned 10 u Younger, u the PRIOR deed is
not recon ded W tim The limited time; aud
the power is the same whether the u, "a
j. dated beiOre or alier the passage vi
the recording act Though the effect 81
such law is to r+nJer'lhe prior derd
iraudutrn, and v"ii as against sunsc
qurnt purchaser. ii IS not law impair
lag the obligation OF contracts; such tuo
il the loW-r 10 pass acts oil l,milati u
and their effect. Reasons OF SQUAD poll
CIV have led 10 the general adoption oil
laws ot both descriptions, and their valid
i'y canno, b.. questioned he lime and
manner al their q. era,iun, the xtc ,lion
IL them. aud the acts from winch The
time limited shall begin 10 rua. vii gen
orally depend On III. sound discretion d,
| the legislature, &C ord,ns 10 the nature
OF the iii es. the situation OF the country,
aud the nerrency Which leads To their
enac,m,ent. Cases may occur where the
provisions Of a law may he so nnreason
able as Ia a,M,uu, TO The denial oil right.
and ca'i for the interpretation oi The
| Court 5 Pet. 2i9.
The obligation o the contrac, between
the parties in this case, was 10 p.riarm
the promises aud undertakings Ssmiaiuei
therein. the right 81 the plaintiff WINS 10
damages for the breach thersc9, u t5riur
SUIT and obtain jdnignra,. 10 take out
and prosecute IN rx'r,i.oa sagaias. she
defendant ull the Judgment was saiiafsri.
Pursuant TO the existing laws sa ihissts
These laws, giving these riRh,s. were as
periec,lv bnd,ng 0U tho defendant, and
as much a part .: the cont raci, a. il they
| had been set to,th IA rs it.u 'as."ns ia The
very words ri the isw relating 10 juir
n,ents and executions. II the ue.eu.lant
| had made such M ~ recMen,, ~ ia su-
,hor,zs q snls OF his property which
should he levied on W the sheriff.
/ Tor such price a. should be b isr Il n, a
lair public sale, on reasonable ns,,ice, i.
would have conferred right on the
pialniiH which the :onst,iut,un made ia
v,uIal,ie; and It Tan make no difference
whether such right is conferred by th,.
terms or law OF the contract. Any sub
scquent law which denies, obs,ructs or
impa'rs this right, by superaddIng u con,
dliun that there shall be no sale Tor an.
su.n less than the value vi the proper,
ficvi~d osl, 10 be- - .eiianled by apprais.-
ment, or amy Olher mode ut valuaiuli
than public sale, affects the obligation,
ui The contract, as much ~ th,. one cas-.
MS the other. Tor as II can be enio,ce1 on.
" by sale ol the defendants properly
the prevention o: such sale IS the deiIa,
Vi u right t
The sa ne power in State Legislature
may he carried t. any extern, u Il exists
! al al, it may proh,bu "A sale tor less
three iourihs, or ntile leilthS rs well rs
iur lwu-tniid., ior, il the power eau 10
. exercised 10 amy extent, IT'S exercise inu i
F, be nitttcr .. uuc,.ii!roi la bio discretion,
IN passing laws reladng ~ tbs remedy
" h.cu are rrsa. u eSs vi The eff-cl on the
r,gh; vi The p,alnll.f.
Tins was the ruling principle OF ih,.
n
Oh u mortgage cuntainins i covenant, thai
in dc,auit vi payment. lln: nor,yasec
IN Sht eater upon. sell aud { uvey the
MOI. tagged premises, as the attorney 81
the ,r' Siser; yet ,ne case was not dc
c,ded un the ctftct ani uol,g ,tlnn ni thai
prmclple, that Il Sta,c law which pro Is.
sedlS provided rcn.uy inr eut,Ic,n.
the contract ol mortgage, ciiecIuaIly M
paired the rights lncrienl 10, anu attach
ell Ia II by the laws IN force at MS date.
was vuid. The agreement or contract
can crrute no more blnuing Oh igaiinn.,
than those tus,eued by the law, winch thc
law creates and attaches 10 CONTRACTS;
the express power who, mnflsagnr
cuniers ON u mori.agvc 10 Sell as his
aseut, Is not more potent than taat whicn
THE law delegates 10 the marshal. to sell
aud convey tue properly levied IN under
un excCu,iun. he Is the cu,istilu cd axcnl
., the deiemdAnt, invested with all his
powers Tor these purposes; tho marshall
G.. u do under the auiuUrity ut tho law,
VIVA. cver he en- % under tho lulles,
,s,w~rs vi attorney from tho executions
debtor, ani no osa,s law eau proaib,l II
Il follows that lnc law ui llinols now
under consideration, 50 TAR as u prohibits
sale Tor less than two-thirds ol tho AZ.
praised valua Of the property levied Oh,
Is uncons,,tu,inn Il and vo,i. J.
The secund nspcc, Ia which hi, cas-
must bs considered, Is with reference TO
tho acts ., Congress, relating 10 proccss
aud proceedings IN the colrls al the Uni
ted States in cssOs nj co.nMnn law. All
tho early laws on this SUBJECT were care.
fully and m,st ably reviewed by tins
c.,ur,, il Waw,nan u Southland, and the
t3,uk Untcj States vs.. H,lstead, IN
which i, was hu,d that the proceedings IN
the c,mr,s of the Un,cd States sauliI b.
the sa,nc N they were IN tho several
States hi the time ot pass,ay the acts al
Congress, sun)~rt a. b.. ailAsed by The
Circutt Courts. Or regulations ut he Sa
premc Court. That tue proceedings TN
..va,.,s,,n,s we're II, N. ys,vertl. hv Slt...