The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1881-02-10

r II. PHuIP5DE- II AL
An,a4i from the Circuit Court Of Chlcka-
s.W C,sutv. Hon. J. 4. Green, Judge.
IsJgment was rendered in tine court below
=. go, defendants in attachment. plaintiffs
A. the opinion Of the Supreme Court IS
..iy.r ia full. it is unnecessary to furnish
anv further statement Of the case.
#GEOuGE, j.
The plaintiffs iu error, sued out an az
sr,,raiut against the defendant upon the
nd rblf tb. latter had disposed Of his
#FI,r,rertv. or some part Di At, with intent 10
-. an unfair preference TO some OF ms cred-
#Ir,r-." and the principal question presented
"a decentralization is, a. TO the true con
structiBu of that portion OF I420 OF the
Code of 1871, which authorized an attacl1
q ruaut when the creditor viii make oatn
4 .tnat bI. debtor has assigned or disposed
If or +, about to assign or dispose OF, MS
praUer.v Dr rights Iu action, or some part
tEars.f with intent 10 defraud his creditors,
or give an unfair preference To some OF
#them Thi. provision 50 far az Z related
10 "au unfair preference was hrst INTRO
ducaI iato the statutes Of tdi5 9L9te by the
Il Co4e u 1897. Arb. ,, p. b.. 1t has not as
vet received Il direct construction IN this
rouf.. though &c has, as we believe, been
frequently construed in the circuit courts,
8 and generally, if ngg uniformity, interpreted
ia accordance with the views which we
her. announce. We have given the ques-
ton chat careful examination which its i'm
pJrauce demands.
The right of q debtor, though in
solvent, or in falling circumstances, to
..,. ,.,.t..-.,..a n, ore ar more of his
~ :, L. hmm nile and with no
- II ...,.,,,. % Iara6f IA himself i a
-. .,.,t.f5-l,aI rl,la ia the iurisnrndence
'' '''- -. I,,,E,- D,,,,L,,
b. 81 d r. ica. J,.,,,5.,o, = l5rea1 18 III
~ - ~ Nj, cTe ~ IIE,,,o,,,,
= ''.'. - IL 81. U,r;gLt = fE,,-
y ID All Of o,biC1 cases were
80 .l.r.,,... a., tr,n.actions nrior
-; ;,,, Jgt. to the code of 1857. since that
III "'-o ~ ~ -. IL, fr.,,,,,a,,fI,, 10,
'i''i' yI1 "'. 10 -, ST.. Do,cy
~ w. ,.,.,, Paul ~ M. fS5,
- ~ '7- ~ ~, ~ III Io2
NJ "'' ~ .:I,,,+;,,, ,,,,,.t
l"9 f' go a. rI,Ia
~ N'"''. ",.' ''-.' ,:i
lhl5 e7'' .-'''i' ''''. ...,.l :,
H. ,cbtnrs t.,t
-, .,.aif;aJ H.
pe.'l IT, ,.r,,,rr,,t,
-iLIoH' n MS ''''l'
r
l3y Gown 'u,g7 D1 "''1t I"e 1870 %
1ig5 III .Iic'l.r I;.nosirions which ware
-. ,.gIiI and urIass an stunf,ir
,, H. 49,. .,.o,,tion al If +ba
-. III -, -
r ilf,.,aI b,. tt,. ,,l,1rl
,'i '' - ~;
law '"a, VI l.0 "a, t lti9
7'''''' NOV I7,I,,,.-. -, -,
prop "ie1"'"7 20 :lit N.oN9' 81 L.
= ~ ''',' ~ - ,|-,I,;t,;t 80
nature ny t"tS Sl""'e 10 Pioniol'' unucI
f','l ,-aIliiI,,. thl I,,,,I,,,o
- ;.-1s,;4 - ~
- ~ I.,L,LLi,i,,-a Las ,I,arol
tl'"' F'' f'7, - - ~ 49,; -, 80
IoLs, "'' r. 'iO lug VI Ple'oi 81
ce7 10 "'o''i'- A. mas oil'E coHd@liiheu "
- w.. W. -
. -, -, T,,,;,iatt,ra ha
- - M; ,,,t,st ~ dator,,li,ad
~ H. -, III tho III Of lou,
-, -, ,,raf,re,,ce. Inv dabtarg or i
IL. ...,,,...ii,n -, he d.sIarnined Inv tbo
- ,,,t H., FL. TN. 1aa,,i,,r ~ ~,
49,. - a., ,,,,a-tio,, .l,r,,II p Iaf,
~. -, IL, III 81,
.,5,[5 f1r odi,,iIIi,,, H.
- r,,T.i5. nf tLa attachma9t ~
~, -,,tr,~,. and in every case
a. MI La,arl ,rou tho oniniops
~ ,r. ,.,a,,1,.rt nf the iurv formai from
tbairou .,aLians. A. to what is "unfair' in
. ,,..-"I -. o. inrv would he N Z
III -J,,ray.ad H. hanL,runt
II .I+ In ,..,,.rt,,,,,,l would he ssunfair,,
and tl,Ir an, -,I,,art haj no ripbt IA make
:, d..,,.i,;.,,, ~ III. ,,ro,ertv excent tn pro-
Viii. a. .,, ,..,,,,i di.trihution of it among
- ~ i,,rv would docide /
Thar sr, ,,r,t,,rel,ca was fIir which was not
c1aI.g,y.,J i.,- iatv And another would |
sustain ar condemn preference as the |
member. of IL niobt think the debtor. in |
view Ms c,n1actions with and obIiga- |
ti.as+, the ,,r.fsrred craditor or other cred !
jt.rs9r.,+ ,,rlt,.rreJ mi,,bt he morally bound |
to meier one or The other. We can not
slLnt q construction which would necessari- |
lvla.I ,.. mol, r.sIIts What is an "un- !
G,i. ,.,.f.rsnce', mnsr therefore be a |
c,,..,i. FL ,Lan tho c,rts attending
!, ''s-''i T. ''., IA H. M, he detar7
G.J.,t III. IL Questions |
L'-ti '' w., i,,I u,Ii%h :. The onIy
'i'g ,@T % i - :, c',,rt the
icy ny "Hlch 70 ~, "a ..e ~ w ~
W az ,,,@-aI sansa cannot |
l. ';;.,,.J,rj ~ a,,1, ca.a sinoa Thai
-. ne .''t', III - 49, ,Lo iav
""'" o' % H'''"e h'9 "i',' o"u ''' Stio i
o the land the rule oil decision Inc ID"
DIS not denom'nate any transaction as
uiidir Whlch IL tpleraleS ana ehfofceS as
NaId, whatever may be ITS nature, Wheh
Considered IN purely moral point OF view,
Curtis know nothing OF an "unialrness
Which does not result from rule OF la"
codemninS 1t on that account lrahsac-
uos when before court Tor enforcement
or imminent gre either wand or Invalid
ant they are the one or the other, as ihey
3Ieln accordance with, or contrary 10 law
II TRANSACTION be legally Yahd, IL must De /
entrced; and the Judge IN decreelnS Its
Perornance. has no right or power to say
III unfair, orunJust. His sole duty Is TO
ascertain the rights OF the parties, as liked
by lw, and, having ascertained, to enforce
then.
# follows therefore, that no prefer
enceis unfair which, tested by the rules
OF l.w, is legal. As the statute does
not Pretend to define these rules, we must
necessarily resort to the rules which have
been fd down by the courts and have re-
ceivedkheir sanction, As the law of the land,