Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1900-07-12

the evident purpose of law 1t says
such instrument, ETC., and when we
look to What such refers to, we find
it is an instrument the person whose
duty 1t was to stamp has left |
unstamped with intent to evade the |
provisions of this act
st is scarcely possible that con-
gress intended that one who deliber-
ately and Intentionally violated the
law might escape by paying a fine not
exceeding fifty dollars while one who
was perfectly innocent of doing so
should have his title, deed or other
valuable paper declared invalid and OF
no effect. Under the statute it is the
duty of the grantor in the deed, or
the party issuing, selling or transfer
ring the instrument, document or
other paper, to affix the stamp and,
if the construction contended for he
followed a designing grantor taking
the chances of prosecution might
impose on an innocent purchaser
whose title would be worthless, altho
he was absolutely free from any sus-
picion of wrongdoing or intention OF
evading the law.
"The war revenue act further pro-
vides that when it shall appear to the
collector to his satisfaction, that ali
instrument was not duly stamped by
reason of accident mistake, inadvert-
ence, or urgent necessity and without
any willful design to defraud the Unit
ed States Of the stamp, or to evade or
delay the payment thereof then, IL
the instrument or properly proven
copy thereof shall within twelve cal
endar months after making or is
suing thereof be taken to the collect
or and the stamp tax paid, he can re-
NIT the penalty and cause the instru-
ment to be stamped. And when it is so
stamped the officer having charge of
the record is authorized to make a
new record thereof or to note upon
the original record the fact that the
error or omission in the stamping of
said original instrument has been cor
rected pursuant to law thus conclus-
lively showing that it was not intended
to make the record of every unstamp-
ed instrument null and void, for if it
was, the act would unuestionably have
required new record and would not
have authorized the correction of the
original one, made contrary to law.
But it does not stop there, for it adds
and the original instrument, or such
certified copy or the record thereof,
may be used in all courts and places
in the same manner and with IKE
effect as if the instrument had been
originally stamped.
After discussing the law at length
as we'll as decisions tending to snow
that the court is right, the court
says ass
1--WE are of the opinion, then, that
the record of this assignment of the
mortgage was not void by reason OF
not being stamped, but at most was
Ionly prohibited from being used IN eV.
idence before it was stamped, and
when that was done by the collector
upon being satisfied that the STAMP
was omitted thru inadvertance and
not wilfully, and the officer noted that
| fact upon the original record as au
thorized by the act, the right to use
the assignment, after it had been
stamped when it should have been
was restored and related back to the
time it was made, subject only to an,
rights in it, or the property secured
| by the mortgage bona fide acquired II
the meantime.
"Other cases might be cited tt
show that the result of many deci
sions has been to give the subsequent
stamping of instruments under the
United States revenue laws aretroac
tive effect, but we will not prolons
this opinion by doing SO. Decree re
yersed and cause remanded." 9fae
Duty of Recording Officer.
The commissioner of internal reve
nue. has issued the following bulletin
for the guidance of county recorder
4 and others in recording stamped in
struments but neglecting to make
minute of the fact that the instru
Iment was stamped when recorded
The commissioner says that no penal
ty attaches for failure to- make tn
: minute but cites the fact that sue!
! failure casts cloud upon the title
The abstractor finding no indication
upon the record that the conveyanc
or mortgage had been stamped, coul
not conscientiously certify to the It'll
as being valid in the grantee or NOR
gagee. The proper remedy for sue
omissions by recording officers woul
seem to be that publicity be given t
the fact generally, in their severa
communities, by internal revenue off
GERS and, by publication that propert
rights are being jeopardized by tn
, negligence of such officers.
1t is, of course, to be understoo
that the defective record does not il
validate the original instrument If
. is properly stamped. The loss of tn
original instrument might in sue
case cause trouble.
Return of Penalty Refused.
A claim was made to the commi.
sioner for the return of penalty c
$40 which had been collected from
notary public for failure to place
stamp upon an instrument. The con
missioner refused to return the MOI
ey and says:
Where penalties have been incu
red for failure to stamp instrument
section 10 of the act of June 10, 1897
provides that if within twelve month
after failure to stamp the instrument
', the parties failing to stamp the1
, shall bring them to the collector an
nav the DrOner StamD charges thereO