The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1865-10-14

. ing its obligation and without redress. We
. it might vary the nature and extent ofrem
. edies so always that some substantive rem
. edy be-, in fact, left Thus the declaration
Of the Court in Townsend vs.. Townsend
cited and relied upon BY the counsel. It the
: can be held ever 70 have had any ID her au
thorIty thau extra Judicial dicta.a-e neutral
iEsd by the decision in Woodhn vs. Hooper
This case does more it determines thatthO
State Legs aturs may, without infringing
the constitution, deprive the crodi
tor 0fhis most cogent and effective remedy
and 10 an aDgrv and hanied cred
tor the most cherished. oy releasing BIZ
debtor from imprisonment; and restricts u.
IN the present instance TO the inquiry wheth-
e the act Of the Goth Of january. 1851
leaves, in tact, 70 the creditor any subsian-
| tive remedy.
The act, s., fer as it is necessary 70 exam
Inc 1t, is Is follows;
Be @ enacted, etc.. That from and after
the passage OF this act, an judmeuts and de-
crees that shall Be rendered IN any Of the
| courts Of record ofthis Slate. or which shall
be rendered by justices Of the peace Of this
State for money, shall be stayed by such
/ courts and justices for the period Of twelve
/ months from the rendition Of such decree or
/ judgment: Pr0rifsd That the defendant
OF defendants in said judgmsut decree
I shall appear before said courts Of record du-
4 ring the term Of said eaurtl within tive
! DAYS after the rendition Ol the jud gment be-
fore justices Of the peace, and give good and
ample security for the stay % execution. 70
be approved Of by said courts OF Justices.
which stay shall operate as Judgment
assiust the security in said court or before
said Justices"
Oiher provisions are contained. looking 20
The act expired by It's own limitation on
the lst july, 1862
Whatever may be our opinion a. % the
policy Of The law, Il Is our duty 10 admins
Ter g, unless we are clearly satisfied Of ITS
unconstituuonahty. We simply repeat the
uniform language Of the supreme Court Of
the United states in saying that " il IS but a
decent respect duetO the wisdom. the integri-
ty and the patriotism OF the Legislative body
BY which any law is passed, 90 presume 10
favor Of its validity, until is violation Of the
Constitution Is proved, beyond all reasaua-
bic doubt ~ Wheaton, 2I0.)
This act undoubtedly varies the extent Of
the remedy existing at the time OF its
passage, aud was msuiiestly intended 20
afford another equally certain to the creditor
and more favorable - the debtor. 10 was
passed during the period OF impending
bankruptcy which Immediately preceded
the rebellion, aud which had much 70 do in
stimulating its earlier movement. The
only question is, does Nc in fact leave % the
creditor "a substantive remedy" against the
debtor. To state the question Is 10 decide
il. Judgments and DEGREES were 20 be rem
dered as heretofore; then 40 the option Of
the debtor. the creditor had execution at
once, or "good aud SIMPLE security" and
exc cution against both doctor and security
"a. %
must be admitted to be real, substantial and
effective, and not merely nominal and illu-
sory. We are not prepared 90 say that in
the pecul ar condition Of affairs al that time
Il may not have appeared 10 the Legislature
which enacted It a. supply ing 20 the cred
Itor, by giving % the debtor tlme and keep
ing alive his hope and arousiug an iu
creased energy, and interesting friends d.
rectly in his behalf, a higher assurance Of
ultimate satisfaction H0Weyer that may
have been our decision cannot depend upon
the comparative efficiency Of remedies. Since
a remedy solid ana valuable has m TACT been
provided, We are rsqu red by the prev ious
decision Of the court 90 declare this a good
and valid act; aud 20 give it effect. We
have had our attention directed to several
cases from the courts Of some of the sister
States, supposed 20 be ia conflict with these
views. Only brief notes of the cases have
been accessible, so that we are unable 90 as
certain the precise facts which were iu
judgment. So far as We eau see they
were determined earlier than the case Of
Ogden vs.. Saunders, and upon the theory
that the obligation Of contract Is identical
snd ,o-eXteusive with the laws in being al
the time 20 enforce 10 and that any legisla-
tiOn which varies either the nature OF exc
tent OF the REMEDY impairs the obligation: a
theory which. as We have seen, was re-
iected by a majority OF the court In that
much considered case.
This opinion is confined 90 the case and TO
the part Of the statute actually under con-
sideraiiOn. There are other provisions con
tanned in it, which we have had no occasion
to examine and about the validity Of which
we express no opinion.
The court taking such action as should
have been taken in the court below, viii d.
rect thst the offered security be accepted,
and the cri0d Of the stay having long since
elapsed, execution viii issue Immediately
gainss the defendants 10 the Judgment and
the security, Tor the amount Of the judg-
ment, with intere Q from the date OF is rem
dtion until collected, and the costs Of the
Circuit Court.
MkYNARD, SpsciaI JUDGE.