act at once upon the legislature. It does so act. The moral obligation in that direction is complete, and no other or greater can ever be imposed upon a legislative body. For non-action there would be no remedy; but if the legislature act at all it must act in the line directed by the constitution, or its action will be void. People v. McRoberts, 62 Ill. 38; People v. Rumsey, 64 Ill. 44.
Relator was properly held by the magistrate, and must be remanded to the custody of the respondent; and it is so ordered. All concur.
Reporter: See also State v. Dorr, 19 Atl. Rep. 171; S. C. 82 Me. 212.
Edward L. Baker et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Lucius D. Marsh et al., Defendants and Respondents.
1. Mortgages—Foreclosure—Sale.
Where a debt is secured by mortgage on several parcels of lands, and the court finds that the mortgagee is entitled to a sale thereof, it has no authority to except any part thereof from the decree of sale, though the value of the remainder is greater than the amount of the debt.
(Opinion Filed February 5, 1890.)
APPEAL from district court, Barnes county; Hon. William H. Francis, Judge.
Action by Edward L. Baker and others, trustees of the estate of Robert H. Baker, deceased, against Lucius D. Marsh, as administrator of John Marsh, deceased, John Kurtz, Phebe Marsh, and others, to foreclose a mortgage on three parcels of land executed by John Marsh and John Kurtz to Robert H. Baker. One of these parcels of land had been conveyed to Phebe Marsh subsequent to the mortgage, and improvements had been made thereon by her. The case was referred, for the taking of testimony and ascertaining the value of the premises. The value of the two parcels was found to be greater than the mortgage debt. The court found that plaintiffs were entitled to the sale of all the premises, but decreed that the two parcels be sold, and the other be excepted from the sale; and plaintiffs appeal.
