Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1845-08-07

there for such purpose fer years. but which
could be removed without injery 10 the building with
which connected BY braces, held 10 be hx-
and to by mortgage Of the land on which a.
was erected, 10 the mortgage
subsequent mortgage of real estate, though first re-
corded will prevail against prior which not
recorded in IT the subsequent mortgage had actual
notice OF the prior mortgage
Where judgment is obtained against mortgagor sub
sequently the mortgage, but before the mortgage Is
corded the mortgage has the priority But perhaps DO
fds purchaser sheriffs sale under such Judgment
would be preferred 10 the mortgsgor Decree affirmed
7ndresrs T. Russell ct al. Error the Shelby C. c.
Opinion by DEWEY j. Assumpsit by the payees ssainst
the maker OF promissory nOte dated IN May, le4O Tor
Sl204 So payable in months. Plea the general rs
On the trial the plaintiff gave in evidence the note
described in the declaration whereuPon II was agreed
by the parties that the consideration of the note
debt of S05 from the maker TO the payees and that
the of 500 so included in The note interest
forbearance of the debt for months, being
the Of 20 per cent per annum, making the aggregate
expressed the face of the The cause
submitted to the court Judgment for the plaintiff tor
SI095; and the defendants for the
In FOlcer ThrOekmOrtOR Backford 326, this court
decided that action could be sustained writing
obligatory for the payment of certain OF money,a
part of which illegal interest," the ground that the
statute of 1885, which forbade the reception Of agree
ment for usury, rendered the contract void The
in force the date Of the promssory note
which this action founded Since the above mention
ed decision made, the Legislature has passed act
by hch il provided that usuTious shall
be void but that actions upon them, the plaintiff shall
the principal sum without INTEREST," and that s
defendant shall recover cost r. s. 1913, SCI sec29
This statute include made BEFORE
well as those made after its passage The judgment
of the conforms and Is valid, unless the
law ITSELF far II respects preexsiing contracts
void This depends upon the constitutional right Of the
Legislature TO pass a retrospective statute.
The only provisions in the Constitution OF the UOited
States the constitution Of this State restrictive Of
the power of the Legislature enact laws operating up
past transactions, those which forbid the passage
"A fgrfQl md lntua
ing the obligation of contracts.
The first prohibition evidently of the ques-
ton the present occasion 10 need comment.
The phrase post taeO technical and has relation
only criminal laws il does embrace staHtes re-
speeding private rights civil remedies Colder rs But
3 Dali. 366-StroDg State Blackford I93 Ii has,
therefore, bearing npon the law under consideration,
Nor is the obligation of any contract impaired by tffs
the contrary its object TO give force and OBJ
legation which, before It's passage lille
gal and void II is retrospective certainly but that IL is
unconstitutional for that too well establish
ed be questioned Brach UOOdhHI, Pet. e. Z. Rep.
g Court of Probate in Connections made adecree dis
approving WILL in consequence OF which the right Of
the heir at law the devised premises remained unm
paired The Legislature of that State passed law set
ting aside the decree and ordering trial. The will
finally established and the devIsee held the property.
The Supreme Court Of the United States decided the law
to be constitutional Colder rs Bull, supra. Two per-
held land in in Pennsy lvana, under what
called Connecticut title. They made partition and
became mutual tenants each other under leases In
action of eectmen respecting some OF the premises thus
leased, Supreme COurt OF pennsylvania DECIDED
the relation OF landlord and tenant could not exist be-
tween persons holding under Connecticut title. The
Legislature subsequently passed law that the relation OF
landlord and did and should exist between such
persons Ii held by the Supreme Court Of the Unit
ed States that the law constitutional Sattertee
.NathesrSOR, Pet $50. person died in New Hamp-
shire seized of real Rhode lslaDd he devised
that property his daughter. His will proved by
his executrix New Hampshire, and license to sell his
real estate TO pay debts was procured from Courof
Probate Under that license and for that purpose,
[ he I Island.
ed deed the purchaser The Legislature of that State
passed law confirming the title in the purchaser 1t
decided that the law consutiona and that gave
validity the deed which otherwise null and void.
Wilkinson Leland ct al 9 Pet. 627. Thus
that retrospective laws not necessarily unconstituons
al. That is in general mex pedien and injurious
the public interest pass them not to be questioned.
But of things may, and sometimes does exist, which
renders retrospective legislation desirable, and highly
equitable in effects and cannot but think that such
a crisis demanded the passage of law winch have
been considering For than 80 years prior 1881,
usurious expressly declared by law be
valid for the principal sum, and void only TO the inter-
and though from that period the saving clause
repealed effect of the repeal upon the validity of the
contract judiciay settled until the decision Of
the of FO1cIer ThrOekmOTtOn, supra, 1912 In
the meantime il reasonable suppose many usurious
had been made under the belief that nothing
but the interest jeoParded which nsser
would have existed had the public been apprsed of the
real state of the law. Under these circumstances we
think the law be indicated the of sound
policy and justice, well that of constituionality.
We have said that the only provisions in the federal
State constitution restrictive of the power OF the legsfa
retrospective law those before
toned We do not however mean to say that retro
spective law may be void though violate express
prohibition. There certain absolute rights, and the
right of property among them, which, all free gov
ernments of necessity be protected from legislative
intererences irrespective Of constitutional checks and
guards
The judgment Of the circuit court is affirmed with costs
and per cent damages.
w Herod for plaintiff, w. Quarles and ]. H. Bradley
for the defendants