Montpelier examiner. [volume] (Montpelier, Idaho) 1895-1937, 1899-05-18

uOIIiS So. He IalTueSS Oh bH0
transaction out Of which SAID mort
gage arose is fully shown, Spence
having received $2500 therefor.
Mrs. Spence testified that she
signed said mortgage freely and
voluntarily and without any force
or coercion on the part Of her hus-
band. Said mortgage was drawn
by said Spence and he attended
to the execution of it and delivered
it to Mrs. Humphreys.
cit was regular ON its face and
the certificate Of acknowledgment
thereto was in due form and GER
titled by I. Il. Mantonya, the audi.
tor and recorder Of Bear Lake
county.
"To overcome the certificate of
acknowledgment under the facts of
this case, the evidence must be
clear and convincing. The proof
Of its alsity must be made beyond
a reasonable doubt.
"The certificate of ack knowledge
ment, if in proper form, must pre-
vail over the unsupported testi-
mony of the grantsr.
Public policy requires that such
certificate should prevail oyer the
unsupported testimony If IN in-
terested party, clhrcDise .!cye
would be no pcrn&uency and but
slight security IN titles Of lands
Counsel for r spondcnt con
tends that Il married woman ought
to have the same right to inpeacn
the certif, at Of her appoafat Y
before the officer mak1le H. t
in fact she did no. yppo4e
him, that . man haa rs NJ
deed, protesting to he slgGel ii
him, to be forgery. and cites
long list Of authorities in support
Of that proposition. We indnrse
, it, but that rele does not apply to
the case at bar.
"The married woman in this
} case is not attempting to impeacfi
the mortgage in question. II she
! were, and established its falsity
beyond q reasonable doubt, she
: would be sustained in her eonten-
ton.
"In the case at bar, the mortgage
Of said married woman is attempt
ing to impeach a certificate Of az.
} acknowledgement that ia valid on it's
face and has failed to establish its
, falsity beyond reasonable doubt:
+ ''Unless this rigid rule be en-
forced, the officer taking the ac-
|, acknowledgement and certifying t.
g the same. would be at the mercy
, Of the INSCRIPTIONS grantor and
! perhaps liable in damages to any
party injured by certificate held
i. to be false. 4 Il
: "The Humphreys mortgage and
certificate of acknowledgement
r thereto are valid on their face.
The respondent accepted q mort
gage from Spence and his wife OH
: the same premises with full know
ledge Of those facts, and when he
g brought this suit to foreclose his
said mortgage, he attacked the
: validity of said Humphreys mort
gage, and the judgment and decree
) foreclosing the same on the ground
that the wife Of Spence did not up.
= pear before the officer taking said
9 acknowledgment, but failed to
r establish that fact beyond rea-
& sonable doubt. He therefor must
0 fail in his suit against said juG g
ment and decree.
: at is alleged in the complaint
e and found by the court, that the
n sherif's sale under the foreclosure
decree of the Humphreys mort
3 gage took place on the 18th day
;. Of November, 1887, thus showing
q shat the time for redemption there.
from has long since expired. For
- which reason the respondent is not
It entitled to a decree foreGlosing his
;. mortgage on the real estate sued
@ on herein.
It "The Indignant is modified anG
v the cause remanded with instruc-
tions to dismiss the action al
: against the appelient, Frederick
= W. Law, az administrator of til,
= estate Of Hannah B. Humphreys
e deceased, and to strike out of til,
= decree that part which directs TIL,
n foreclosure Of the plaintiffs rea
estate mortgage. The indgren
ut appealed from as herein modified
d is affirmed.
+ Costs of appeal are awarded t,
appellant.
ID "Quarles, J., did not cit al tn
t hearing Of this case and took n
is part in the decision.