Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1919-01-03
20
Ne tefor clearing titles to real estate at 0ns
SQUEEZE md tho same time. once and oecs
GTt0dhN for All claims extending from tHe

u9hIy for all claims extending from tHe
latest deed hack to the time Of Adam
or earlier. / say earlier than Adam, not
falling to include both known and UNI
known claimants before that time, for
since anthopologists have proved thar
there WIS some life before Adam. II Is
quite certain that II the method did
not include said claimants, some bril-
liant lawyer who prides himself on his
reputation as an abstractor would hil
II necessary to bring suit to quiet
title 1856 per day please) against the
cshes of some ignorant pre- historic
ancestor. In order that said lawyers
client could boast OF clear title OF
his property. (by gary until such
time, at least, when said owner at,
tempted to dispose OF said property.
when the would be purchasers lawyer
desiring Ia establish a reputation as a
keen. thorough abstractor would find
certain very serious flaws in the title
dating back to the time just after
Adam and before Noah, then
But why continue to figure? Any
lawyer who has experienced IA number
of real estate transactions can doubt
less appreciate the foregoing example
anu VIII NY ossSieoh'
that the existing conditions on real
estate titles is shame, gross in
justice to property owners and permits
huge graft for certain members OF
the legal profession that belittles them
and their profession and places huge
question mark against our whole sys-
TEN OF justice In the minds OF many
well meaning citizens For neither can
the courts which hear SUCH cases and
grant DEGREES on such cases escape
with clear robes There is no equity In
u procedure. which costs the property
owner anywhere from 500 to $500. tde-
pending On the size Of his rolO against
people who never dreamed of being
claimants to his property and whose
bones in many cases have long since
mingled with the dust. There is still
less equity or justice in the fact that
after the bills have been paid. he or
the next owner has no guarantee that
the process will not have to be re-
peated in the near future on the opin
ion Of a single lawyer, when perhaps
whole dozer other lawyers would
assert that the title is perfectly clear.
The douot having once been raised by
however obscure or ignorant mem
Der OF the profession the property
owner will have trouble in disposinS
of that property until the court has
granted a decree quieting title. Cur
iously enough there is only one side to
the case. There Is of course no ono TO
appear against the contention that the
title u not merchandise and the
judge has apparently no recourse but
TO grant a decree. Easy money? Why,
ths cleyerest bunco game ever devised
pales into a. mere commonplace beside
It,
am not unmindful OF the fact that
the great majority OF our best lawyers
depiore this condition. and base their
title opinions as rule on clear
grounds and at reasonable charges. But
If Il good lawyer gives sound opinion
on an abstract. which afterwards
passes into the hands of a shyster
lawyer who sees n chance to make
some money. the result is that the
shyster becomes. in the public min
the keen abstractor and the other ma :
becomes the shyster, while as matter
of fact the reverse is the case. altho
the public, does not know il. In this
fact lies my grievance against the best
members Of the profession. They are
not lifting a hand TO change this thing
which reacts upon themselves and
upon our whole state system of JUS
tice.
My appeal Is therefore that the law
on this subject be changed completely
making the state responsible for mer-
chantable titles. as is the case in Can
ada, and ruling lawyers who are not
state officers out OF the thing absolute
ly. A mere pittance of the money spent
annually on lawyers abstract fees
would support the necessary state
establishment on the subject in lux
ury.