Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1880-03-06

judicial proceedings had sixty years
ago; a portion of the material pa
pers conceded to have been lost; a
collateral attempt to impeach them,
after this long lapse of time, for
want Of service on the minors; their
regular guardian and father GER
tainly before the court ;.both minors
lived to attain their majority; one
of them lived to be as old as these
proceedings now are and no COM
pIaintmade by either of them and
40 reason given for the long delay.
Under such circumstance as these,
when we see that the County Court
of Pleas and Quarter Sessions-then
superior court within the sense
and meaning Of the term as contra
distinguished from an inferior court
had jurisdiction over the subject
matter OF these judgments and I'M
dertook to and did adjudicate the
rights of the parties, we feel fully
justified in presuming that these
parties were served with process or
in some way had notice so as to
give the court jurisdiction of their
persons, the rule being 'that moth
ing shall be intended to be out of
the jurisdiction of such a court but
that which specially appears to be
SOD and that testing these iudg-
ments under the rule, by the record
alone, that they are valid and cam.
not be collaterally impeached as
attempted by compliments in these
bills.
In these conclusions we are forti-
fed by the disfavor with which the
courts always look upon the prefer
ment of claims that have been per-
mitted to sleep for so great length
OF time as these. have, which are set
up in these bills.
The preSumptions arising from
long lapse of time have been relied
on as one of the grounds of demur-
rer. These presumptions must al
ways have weight when judicial
proceedings so long acquieseed in
are collaterally impeached. 1t is a
maxim almost as old as the com
mon law itself that all the acts of
court of record fare presumed to
have been rightfuily and regularly
DONE" Other presumptions might
be noticed, and others still have
already been alluded to. These
presumptions, and the rules of law
predicated thereon, as to iurisdic-
ton and regularity of proceedings,
apply with all their force to judicial
proceedings to sell land to pay
debts. The title to a vast amount
of the real estate of the country has
been acquired under such proceed
ings. AS matter of necessity and
for the repose of the country, the
law has thrown these safeguards
around them. They are rules de-
manded bya sound public policy,
not only for the protection of titles
already acquired VS.. collateral at
tacks, but to preserve the public
confidence. A large proportion of
the real estate of our country changes
hands through these channels. If
they are to be collaterally impeached
and lightly avoided, without regard
to limit Of time, purchasers would
be brought to look upon them with
distrust, as things "that but palter
with them in double sense - that
keep the word of promise to their
ear and break it to their hope )"
property would be sacrificed and
the interests of all parties disas-
trously- affected. These considera-
tiOns have constrained the courts to
apply these rules and indulge every
reasonable presumption in behalf of
such proceedings in collateral pro-
ceeeings to impeach them.
Complainants present no equities.
The justice of the debts VS.. the de
cedent Bennett Searcy is not ques-
toned. The appropriation of the
proceeds of sale of the property to
their payment is not denied. The
acquiescence of the minors directly
affected, one of whom, the mother
of cOmplainants, lived for nearly
sixty years after the proceedings
were had against her, and for forty
years after the whole estate is
claimed to have descended to her,
is wholly unexplained. The re-
cords filed do not show a want of
jurisdiction over the minors, but do
show that jurisdiction was taken.
This is collateral rsrneao5ei,s to
Impeacn these judgments of sixty
years standing. After a careful
investigation, I am of opinion that
the demurrerS filed are we'll taken,
and the bills will be demurred at
compliments cost. SEAY.
Feb. q, 1880.