Milly v. Stephen Smith
View original image: Page  115
[missing figure]

in KentuckyKentucky and ought to receive in our courts such
construction as it would then receive. What construction
would be there given to it cannot judicially be known
to this Court_ of as the Circuit CourtCircuit Court decides, SmithSmith became
by virtue of the instrument of writing executed to him by
Shipman the legal owner of MillyMilly , and if as it has been
contended in argument, the recording of that instrument is
by the Statutes of KentuckyKentucky notice to all persons, of Smiths night
same evidence of these laws of KentuckyKentucky ought, we think to
have been preserved on the record. If we are to cause true,
the writing according to our own laws (which must govern
us where the foreign law is not proved) we are inclined to
think Shipman is the legal owner. Since by the contract
the right of possession remained in him for an indefinite
time and SmithSmith had only a lien on her to secure the payment
of debts, which lien Shipman might at any time have defea
=ted by paying those debts.

The judgment of the Circuit CourtCircuit Court is recorded
and the cause sent back for further proceedings.

Mathias McGirk
George Jampkins
R WashR Wash