The Brookhaven leader. [volume] (Brookhaven, Miss.) 1883-1891, 1888-01-19
An Iniquity That the Legisla-
ture ShouId Hasten to Remove.

An Iniquity That the Legisla-
ture should Hasten to Remove.
Il was with much regret that we
learned of the defeat in the Senate
Yesterday of Senator TaylOr's bill to
regulate the sale of property under
deeds of trust, and prevent some OF
the abuses which may occur under
the present law.
And yet we believe that the bill did
not 90 far enough. The deed of trust
law is an entirely unnecessary andin-
iouitous machine which should be
wiped from the statute books.
Under this law the grOssest injus-
tice can be done, and the victim left
without remedy.
The power to sell the property at
half advertised sale, and no matter
how little the sale brings, to let ii
stand as finality, and probably add
to it judgment against the person
thus robbed, is an injustice so great
that it should demand the first atten-
ton of our law makers.
The only argument urged against
Senator Taylor's bill, which almost
entirely swept the odious system
away, was, that by only allowing a
mortgage to be foreclOsed in chancery
court, litigation was increased. We'll
in the name of God, if an outrageous
injustice is to be permitted to save
litigation, what is litigation fort
They might take away a man:
right to recover any property OF
money taken or borrowed from him
and say it saves litigation, and il
would save it with no greater injus'
tice than may be done under the deed
of trust system.
But even if it would add to litiga.
ton, which is questionable, it would
be better than putting the debtor alb
solutely at the mercy of the creditor a
he now is. At present no matter il
one half the alleged Indebtedness ii
utterly false, the debtor has no alter
native except the expensive and dan
gerous one of getting out an injunc
ton against the sale, to do which hi
is compelled to give a heavy bond
and run the risk of getting judgment
against himself for damages.
Although it may be true that in the
majority of cases the debtor is treated
fairly, it is not because he is protect
ed by law, but because the person en-.
forcing the deed chooses to be just.
The fact that under this system @
man owing hundred dollars may
give deed of trust on place worth 6
thousand, and being unable to pay
the creditor may publish, or rather
hide, the proposed sale on three little
notices, posted up where he chooses
and then when no one is present at the
sale, as is usually the case, may buy
the place in for seventy-five dollars
and get Judgment against the help
less debtor for the other twenty-five
| iitCA VI
dOllars-the fact that such things can
now be done-and the fact that in O
more moderate way such Outrages are
often committed, cry out against this
system and cOrrobOrate a recent state
lnent of Marshall Miller, our Attorney
General, that az more infamous out
rage than our deed of trust law never
disgraced the statute books of any
State
Our Legislators all pretend to come
here in the interest of the poor an(
the oppressed, but ifthey vote agains
the repeal of this iniqnity, whicl
blackens the statute books of only tw,
American States, they cannot here
after claim that they did not favO
legislation in the interest of Oppres
sion and injustice.-New Mississippian