New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-11-13
EFFECTS OF THE YEW INTEREST LAW

QUESTIONS AS TO The RATE AFTER JANUARY l.,
1880, UPON CONTRACTS MADE BFFoRE THAT
DATE, UNDER GER AIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
Two questions arising under the new law
when Of interest in this state per cent
after January 1880. have gwen rise TO considerable
discussion. but have not heretofore been adlu-
dIcaled upon Que Of these was as 10 the
rate of interest after January 1, 1880, upon
mortgages that became due between tne time Of the
passage of the and wh It went INTO effect.
ami continued run after that time without formal re-
newal. The Attorney General, In an opinion which lie
wrote the subject thought that in the absence OF any
special agreement the tacit renewal Of
the mortgage being made after the passage and ID con-
temptation Of effect OF the law, would require thai
tae after January l. 1880, should be per cent
No Involving exact point has yet been brought
before the courts
Judge Freedman. however, in the Superior Court.
Special Term, Yesterday passed upon the other some
what similar question that came mp IN the SUIT Of an asSo
cation for the relief OF respectable aged ipdlSent
etc, against Alexander Ceson aud otners on
a motion for the confirmation OF the report Of the
referee computing due and FOR Judgment of fore
closure. The bond aud mJrsage IN question were made
N 1870 to secure the payment II The OF $4,000 al
che expiration Of three years from the date thor OIL to
eether vita interest at the rate pr per annum
Judge Freedman says thai The question which arises as
Tho proper of in since January l. 1850 IS
very important and novel one. aud as suan has re-
ccved careful attention. lie says: Is Chapter 53S,
OF the Laws of 1879. 1t provided that
the rate interest the forbearance
Of any money, goods things in nc ;ion
should be 6 per cent That set By It's terms
Took effect on the 1st Of January, 1880, bnt
Il expressly provides that nothing contained
therein shall be construed az in any way affect
contract or o0ligat,n before the passage Of the
act As the act o 1879 vas to have only pros
pective operation ana especially under the savings
clause contained herein, he II per
unued al least up II January !, 1880 Whether
II can b. continued IN case until the cHtry
Judgment depends the question wnoAer the pay
nent Of interest after default made Constitutes part OF
tue parable obligation of tht contract OF The
remedy provided by law for It's enforcement The pre-
else qucstlun docs not seem 10 nave been determined
IN his state"
Judge Freshman then considers that under
analogous circumstances IN -Hucky, Ind iua II mia
anu wJescy, ana The houIngs OF the courts lie CON
ubue>: FROM the eXtininauOh already made u -um-
clcntY APPEAR that, VIVA river the rue rule be
winch the contract IS wholly silent
Isl, IH tue case OF Ohtfact Tor hr pa intut OF
certain, on WhCh Interest ~ ne rat OF cent
was lawfully able prOr 10 January l. 1850. b. tne
Of the contract the rate agreed upon nlnues
OF the nIurdlrobc UDgat on Of tue coatIact mil
Judgment, nOt "1tIstning Tue ca nSH Ia the statue,
though the contract mdured BEFORE suCu change.
For similar reasons II neid Ia Andrews against
Keeier, 10 Hun 81. That when prOmssOly note IT.
Tor less taaH legal OF Interest," the
interest after default IN The paymtnt thereof COZ
tinues "a rate prescribed by the Until
merged INTO judgment Iue re. therefore right
computing interest nj tue Of cent 10 The
plaintiff have Inc usual judgment thereon"
William Venvili appeared rs attorney, aud NJ A. kur-
sused, OF counsel. fOr tEe m"tI0n; j. W. Hawes, AS
guardian ad Item for INFANT defendant. Edward Eagle