The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1917-10-27

uOn allOgetner IN favor of the defend
ants 1t is stipulated that they knew
nothing OF the plaintiffs title when
the recorded mortgage was ample no.
tice to them.
Defendants base their claim of title
on laws of 1903, chapter 1872, AN act
amending sections 1904 and 3505 of
the Revised Codes, relating to the
recording Of conveyances and the ef-
feet thereof" The amendment is an
addition to the effect that every con-
veyance of land not recorded shall be
void against an attachment levied
thereon or a judgment obtained at the
suit of any party against the person
in whose name the title to such land
appears of record. The amendment
is void for several reasons:
I. 1t was not passed by the legis-
latiye assembly. (Here ! cite the SEN
ate and house journals, showing that
the amended act was rushed through
on the last three days of the legisla-
tive session. That it was not passed
as provided by the constitution and
that the title was made up after the
passage Of the act.)
Section CT Of the constitution is
mandatory. Under it every bill for
an act must embrace only one sub
jcct, which must be expressed in it's
title. The title of an act must go with
it from the beginning to the end, so as
to give notice to the lawmakers and
the people of the subject and purpose
of a ort IHhn fit1n ,hn fnr-
mulated after the passage Of the act;
and when a bill has been voted on
and lost it may not be again submitted
for passage without prevailing mo-
ton to reconsider it. Hence, the act
in question was never passed, and it
is not a law.
2. The act is in conflict with the
fourteenth amendment, that no state
shall deprive any person OF property
without due process Of law. The
amendment declares every conveyance
of land tc be void as against an at
tachment levied thereon or a judg-
ment at the suit of any party against
the person in whose name the title
to the land appears of record prior to
the record Of such conveyance. In
der such a statute no person could
safely take title to land unless he
stood in the Office of the register of
deeds and filed his conveyance imme-
diately. A party paying $4,000 cash
for a tract OF land and filing his deed
in two minutes might find that a judy
ment for $4,000 had just been docket
ed against his grantor. Thus by pay.
ing to docket judgment, purchaser
in good faith, nowise in fault, might
be deprived of his land A person
may put a dollar in the slot with a
positive assurance Of gaining several
thousand at the expense of some in
nocent purchaser That is no due pro-
cess OF law. UNDER our statute on
transfers a grant of land vests in the
grantee the title without any record
ing of the conveyance and vested
title to land may not, be set aside in
a twinkling by merely filing a paper
claim against it. When claimant
pays merely the expense of filing a
claim he pays no consideration for the
land He is not bona fide purchaser,
and the law cannot make him such.
Counsel for plaintiff has not present
ed these points in his brief, but that
does not relieve this court of respOn-
sibilty. Every lawyer has a certif.
cate from the court that he is COM
petent and may safely be trusted to
conduct the trial of case. Suitors
have a right to rely on, such certifi-
cate. Hence, it is. the duty of this
court to protect them, against errors OF
their lawyers. ..,