Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-01-17


The memorial Of the Chamber OF Com
merce in relation to the statute Of limitation
came up in the House on the 9th, through
Mr.. Wilson, Chairmanof eJndiciary Com
nittee, who said:
! am instructed BY the Committee on the
Judiciary to report back memorial OF the
Chamber of Commerce of the citv Of New
York, and 70 ask that the committee be,dis,
charged from its further Consideration. K
desire to state the reasons for the action of
the committee. Il is a memorial asking
that the statute Of limitation be 50 amended
as TO suspend action during the lime Of the
existence Of the rebellion, in order thu the
citizens OF the loyal States may not b. barred
Of their right of action against debtors resi-
ding within the rebellions' states. Ds,rinft
the Thirty-eighth Congress reported bill
from the committee on the judiciary. which
passed both Houses and is now the Law, and
which, reads as follows: THAT whenever
during the existence Of the present rebellion
any, action, civil or criminal, shall accrue
against any person who, BY reason; of re-
sistance to the execution OF the laws Of The
United States, or the interruption of.the or2
binary course Of aprejudieiaIs proceedings.
cannot be served with process for the com
mencement Of such action on the arrest Of
such person or whenever alter such action.
civil or critical, shall have accrued. such
person cannot by reason of such resistance OF
the laws or such interruption Of iudieial pro-
ceedings be arrested or served with process
for the commencement Of The action. the
time during which such person shan 50 be
beyond the reach of legal process shall not
hca fahr
limited by law for the, commencement of
such action. - i'-
% In the opinion of the tommiftee on The
Judiciary, this = act coyers the gromd EN-
braced in this memorial Of the Chamber of
Commerce, 80 far as Congress has the power
to respond to the prayer Of the memorial
ists. s sfH lfs .eniIaIa ifs0E
q, Mr.. Conkling II ask the Chairman of the
Committee on the Judiciary 70 state to the
House what, in his opinion, IS the eject Of
the statute which he has read in staying or
keeping alive remedies in the State Courts
Of the rebellious States in cases between ,eiti-
zens Of the State of New York, for example,
and citizens residing in those States. have
my own views about il, and Z doubt not he
has has. ~ Einisrf I'll 1ssti 7. i1zi aaf
Mr.. Wilson, Of 0hio-The Cemmitteeare
Of opinion that the latter part Of this statute
Is as broad as congressional enactments could
provide all.s2 HE .sifLoTrl 1850 lebiA
Mr.. Conklmg--Row broad isii ?laWhat
is the effect ofn2Bsa eaiiose) a,noE sd
Mr.. Wilson, of Iowa; The language of the
statute gives il better than anv Construction
/ can give. The time during which such
person shah So be beyend atheB reach
OF legal process shall q not be deemed
or taken as any part of the time
limited by law for the commencement
OF such 10 action. 91 Pie point | be-
lieve to which thegentIeman seeks to direct
my attention, is this Whether this statute
will prevent the operation Of the, statutes of
limitation Of the States in relation to actions
commenced In the State courts, / am not
prepared to say it will go that far, nor wns
the committee prepared to say that we could
provide by law that the statute elimination
ina State could be suspended in its opera
ton upon actions brought in the State
courts by Congressional action. The rene
dy which seemed to be sought by the memo
rialists was this. that citizens residing. for
instance, in the State of New York having
claims against persons residing in South Carr
olina, might have their remedy in the courts
VI thS ChAeCu DtttcS WltilOut Dclng D3rrcQ
by the statute of limitations in force during
the existence of the rebellion.ar I'm other
words, they want the statute Of, Limitations
suspended during the period of the rebel
lion. We think the law now does this. We
did not specially consider the question as to
the power of Congress to suspend the stat
ute of limitation of the particular States,
and prevent their operation upon actions
brought in the State courts as distinguished
from the courts of the United States held
within those State'.l | think however, and
IN this the committee concur, that where the
action was brought in United States court,
this statute Is broad enough to save the rem
edy, and reaches As far as we may safely go.
| have merely called the attention Of the
House to this act for the purpose OF, calling
the attention Of the conntfy to the existence
of the statute which have read, and which
seems not to have been very generally no
ticed, have nothing further, to add. And
now move that The committee be dis
charged from the further consideration Of
the memorial, and that it sc laid upon the
table. si1idi sta ld 10 1y'frf