Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-02-12

tor in given case in sut,ec;iug the entire amount
Of the debtors property. subject to execution 10
the payment Of the debt in sast Curran V. Ar.
ksnsas - Howard L 5, p 304
ms Court Jgdiclsaly knows, and i mast de
eide The question. one Of law up0n its Jufiiesl
Know edge, that the -igatto sell ttonce theentire
absolute fee simple Ia land. and give the purcha-
ser possession, Is worth more will be more likely
TO realize the amount of money due on a partcu-
iar Judgment than the restricted right Of selling
conditional interest in such land: and that hence
the taking away OF such absolute night may tend
10 defeat in given cases tire COLLECTION OF debts
due. purchaser will give more for an ALSO
Lutte title than conditional one; andsfss money
Ell men viii be found to buy conditional titles as
mere investments which NAV be defeated by sim
ply retunding them their money with ten per cent,
when much higher rate may be obtained on the
most select security
But suppose the act in question il 20 be regard
ed rs directed TO the remedy; still, have
seen, an act thus directed may impair the obga
ton of contracts. IL is very doubtful whether
those cases decided upon the general rule of in
ternatioRal law, that the Ter loci governs TO
Interpretation and effect to be given to the terms
OF a contract, and the Ter fori to the remedy
upon IL, are safe guides 70 rely upon in determin
ing the force to be accorded TO the constitutional
provision quoted. These express constitutional re-
strictOns upon the legislative power, are peculiar
to American Governments, and must be inter
preted in accordance with the spirit and purpose
OF their adoption. Stay and relief laws, enacted
by various States before the adoption of the Fed
eral Constitution, were, in part at least the evil
which they were designed to prevent the repeti
ton of. The learned Chancellor De Saussure, of
South Carolina, who lived in the times mentioned,
and Who went upon the equity bench IN lcOc, IN
note to Glaze W Drayton, vol. |, p. l09, of
his reports, decided in 1884, says: "The
Legislature. in consideration of the distressed
state OF the country after the war, Revolution
AIRY War; had passed an act preventing the inn
mediate recovery of debts, and fixing certain pc
RODS for the payment of debts far beyond the
period fixed by the contract of the parties. These
nterierences with private contracts became very
common with most Of the State Legislatures
even after the distress arising from the war
had ceased in great degree. They produced
distrust and irritation throughout the community
to such an extent that new troubles were appre
hended, and nothing contributed more 10 prepare
the public mind for giving up portion of the
State sovereignty and adopting an efficient ma
tional government than these abuses of power by
the State Legislatures. See also on this point
Rawle on the Constitution and Sergeant's Consti
tutional Law.
We have been controlled in coming to our
conclusion bv the decisions. bearing upon the
question, latest made by the Supreme Court of
the United States. We may most safely, we
think, presume that that court will follow and
not depart from those decisions Should such be
the case, it would he detrimental to the public
should this court decide the redemption law oper
alive upon existing contracts, thus leading debt
ors suffer their lands to be sold upon the faith
of a right To redeem, which the Supreme Court
might take away; while, should this Court decide
against the redemption. it will put debtors
their guard to take care of their property; ana
should the Supreme Court afterwards decide in
favor of redemption. the decision of this Court
will not have worked harm to any great extent
The judgment is reversed. cause remanded, &c.