Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1877-11-20
SUPREME COURT.
Abstract of Opinions Delivered.
Knoxville Tribune. 1Oth.l

sotui duu tue lnterest gwen 10 the nrBt
taker, and the principal reserved for the
remainder-man.
Hunter VS.. Smith,. Sureties not es.
topped to deny suretyship by their con-
~versatlon or acts, although they may
have misled officers and witnesses.
2. II they were bound in this case, the
defendant should not upon his affidavit
have procured the dismissal of the ap.
peal upon the ground that they we're not
so bound.
Buckley, Wellington & Co. VS.. Greene
County Iron Company. A mortgage
OF real estate and perishable personally,
made and registered more than a year
prior to the contracting OF debts, and it
not appearing that the m~ortgager was
indebted at the time Of its execution, is
valid.
2. A mortgage Of this character, how
ever, is void as to existing and subse.
quent creditors.
Keebler VS.. Allen-l. Suit was brought
against Catharine Allen, and judgment
rendered after her d~iscoverture. This
Judgment was unrepealed from and un.
reversed, and although it might have
been successfully resisted, it ia valid and
binding until reversed.
2 The support of a debtor, although a
valuable consideration, is not sufficient
to uphold q transfer When the grantor is
insolvent.
3. Homestead cannot be claimed out
Of law fraudulently conveyed.
Walker vs.. Day, Griswold 4 Co:
Note.-ln this case the opinion OF Chan.
cellor Cooper is approved and adopted.
Its principal a~diudications are: /. 1t is
well settled in Tennessee that a suit by
attachment Of property is a proceeding
in personam. not in rem, and that in or.
der to give tie court Jurisdiction in such
cases, there must be jurisdiction Of the
person.
2. Jurisdiction in such case, where the
party has not been actively served with
process, can only be acquired by publ
catisn SO made as to operate as con.
%structlve notice.
3. Publication made within the Fede
eral lines as to a defendant who was not
only beyond the limits of the State but
within the rebel lines, did not affect him
With notice. Communication was pro-
hibited by international law, and was
also impracticable. and therefore the
presumption which attaches to publica-
ton under ordinary circumstances, does
not apply.
4. The case Of McQuiddy vs.. Ware, IA
Wallace, page 20, is not in conflict with
this opinion, and if it were, the policy of
the United States Courts in such cases
cannot apply to the courts of a State
which went into the rebellion and en-
couraged its citizens to go.
D. The poverty of a party, and the
course Of decisions of the courts in this
State for years after the war, and the
prosecution Of an ejectment suit for the
same property, may excuse a delay Of
several years, and protect him against
the im~rutation of laches.
6. The callings Of a deed for certain
streets and alleys do not estop the
grsntor TO dispute their existence, or
bind him to keep them open, and they
do not affect independent rights.
I. The law does not favor estoppels in
pals, and will not enforce them unless
based upon a sufficient consideration, or
intended TO influence the conduct Of
others.
8. Although a person recover his
property sold in a proceeding absolutely
null and void, yet as he seeks the active
ala of a court OF chancery, be will be re
CURED to allow the party in possession
the enhanced value Of the property by
reason Of permanent improvements
made by him in good faith. But the
complainant will be allowed rents and
profits, taxes aud expenditures for nee.
esssry repairs.
3. The purchaser will also be allowed
The money paid by him, which went to
extinguish a bona ide debt Of the com,
plainant, for the satisfaction of which
the said proceedings we're had, especially
where the benefit Of subrogation or trans
fer has been lost by the bar Of the stat
ule Of limitation.
Hote.-Justices Sneed and Turney
dissented from so much Of this opinion
as allows the defendants compensation
for improvements, upon the principle
that a wrong-doer might improve th'
lawful owner out Of bis estate.
While the rule may be different IS Il
private sales, Judge Sneed, in a dissent
log memorandum, holds that 10 case o
Judicial sales the purchaser takes at hi
peril, and being the author Of his owl
misfortune, without the consent or con
R%ivauce Of the true owner, be should b
allowed for improvements only TO the ez
tent Of the rents-and even this seems
hard doctrine in q case like this, wher
the owner Of the land is utterly withou
fault. II a party buying land at q Judi
cial sale is permitted to improve an ia
%nocent owner out Of his inheritance, the
a new and most fertile domain is opene
to spectators and Adventures, and tb
> rule caveat emptor had as we'll be abo
. ished."