Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1908-01-31
LIEN LAW AGAIN.
Bill to Prohibit Mortsasins of UnpIant-
ed Crop.

Bill! to Prohibit Mortsasns Of Unplant-
ed Crop.
Columbia, January 2S: The lien law
was up again for discussion In the
house today and the bill by Mr.. Hy-
drick to require the existence Of crops
to make mortgages valid was passed.
Mr.. Richards, after the passage OF the
Hydrick BILL introduced his bill Of
similar purport.
In the course of the debate Mr.. Ca
rey declared the passage OF this bill
would cause greater confusion In re-
gard to farm labor than the nullifica-
ton of the labor contract law by the
courts had done.
Under special orders Mr.. Hydrick
called up his bill requiring the exist
ence Of crops to make mortgage valid.
This bill is intended to supplement the
repeal Of the lien law. 1t proposes to
amend. section 3005 Of article l, vol
ume /, code of 1902. Mr.. Richards
also had a bill declaring mortgages
and liens on certain crops null and
void, and the two were placed on the
calendar as special orders. Mr.. Hy-
drick made an extended argument
for. his bill and it was also supported
by Mr. Tatum, who proposed an
amendment.
Mr.. Carey explained his objections
to the bill on constitutional grounds.
He declared that the general assembly
could not take away a mans right,
under the common law, to mortgage
his property. A mortgage, he explain
ed, Is a sale. A man has the right to
mortage an unborn calf or unmanu-
featured goods: he can also mortgage
an implanted crop. He declared that
II would be impossible to tell when
crop was up. The seasons are different
in different sections OF the state, and
cotton in Richland Is three weeks a.
head Of Pickens. He opposed the
whole proposition on legal and prac-
tical grounds.
Mr.. Richards declared that the pas
sage of this bill was necessary to make
effective the repeal Of the lien law. He
had been disposed to let this bill rest,
but had been advised that his bill to
repeal the lien law would not be eff
fective without 1t.
Mr.. Yeldell moved the previous
question, which was ordered, =.
The amendment proposed by Mr..
Tatum, which was, In fact, q substi-
tute bill. was rejected.
The motion Of Mr.. McMaster to kill
WAS lIl6H NOlcu dO"H w ch
aye and nay vote Of 81 to 45. The bill
was then passed to a third reading.
The bill Is as follows:
Be 1t enacted by the general assem-
bly, of the state Of South Carolina:
Section 1. That section 3,005 Of
article l, volume /, code Of laws of
South Carolina, 1902, be amended by
adding at the end Of said section the
words land unless the crop or crops
herein referred to shall be growing at
the time Of the execution Of the mort
gage" so that when section 3,00b,
when so amended, shall read as fol-
lows:
Section 3,005. No mortgage Of any
crop or crops shall be good and effec-
tive to convey to the mortgage any
interest in any crop or crops other
than the crop or crops to be raised
during the year in which said mortgage
Is given, and unless the land where
on said crop or crops are to be raised
shall be described or mentioned In
said mortgage, and unless the crop or
crops herein referred to shall be up
and growing at the time Of the execu-
ton of the mortgage.
Section 2. That said amendment
shall not take effect until the first day
Of January, 1909-News and Courier.