Wisconsin herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1846-1849, 1848-09-09

same principle. III men may he lett entire-
" TO their own sagacity in entrusting their
property to other hands, why may not the
same voluntary principle he permitted %
govern the whole transaction, debt as wei
as credit!
That it is incumbent upon every indvid-
ual member. of society to do what is right
and just, is self-evaient; but when the ques-
ton turns upon the enactment of laws 10.
compel right and justice, it becomes a tint-
ter of.eliscuSsion wtetbfsscertaih institutions
accomplish the ends seaght; and when ex-
perence and discussion proves them entire
| ly Intellectual, their aholitfnn becomes ques
tion'of expedency and sound public policy.
However nnaeh jassise't lleu.may be emhod-
I lied in the principle that one man should rem
der to another his dues, il does not follow
as matter of course that that question is in
/ volved in the collection laws. 1 he princlpie
exists in mans natural and correct relations;
but these laws are the mere machinery of
/ fallble minds, and are entitled 10 no consid-
! Grafton, aside from THEN utility.
But so far as the abstract question of JUS
tice is concerned, the opinion of the popular
mind seems to have been pretty well ex-
pressed from time to time, throughout the
| Union. Exemptions exist upon the statute
books Of every state of the Union-from the
exemption of the body of the debtor TO the
exemption of his homestead. Exemptions
are but another name for the repeal of the
collection laws, Just so far as they go, to that
extent are these laws repcaled; and whilst
/ by exemptions the collection laws are entire
/ ly repealed so far as a large class of our
people are concerned, certainly the question
| Of Justice is not involved in the consilera-
1 ton whether they shall he extended 10 COW
err the whole population. If justice be in
volved in the question at issue, then Of ne
cessity rank injustice has been perperated
/ from time to time by the popular mind in
its progressive enactments. And vet we
doubt whether any man will claim that the
Exemptions winch exist on our our own stat
mes are unjust. aud we do not know of a case
on record, where an exemption was made
or extended, that its repeal was ever de-
manded or ever had. Doubtless when the
corpse of the debtor was first exempted, the
idea startled the cnnversatlve minds of the
! age to as great an extent as does now the
Question of homestead exemption, aud your
conmttee conceive that precisely the same
principle existed in one case aS the oiher.-
/ That idea belonged to that age, this belongs
tn this. True, many seek 70 make distinc-
lions. Justice is called one thing, and per-
I haps thrown into prison, (for we are not IN
formed to what extent the demands of jus
tice 90. mercy demands different course
that YOU shall exempt his body aud por-
ton of his property, and that done, Justice
shall again step in and depose Mercy, and
there YOU must stop. We are unable to
make this distinction. Justice is right. To
act Justly is to do rightly; aud whatever JUS
tce may demand, should he done, and will
never conflict with mercy, for if Justice be
/ interfered with, to- that extent, of necessity,
is wrong committed; aud if the collection
laws be just, inen their repeal 10 an extent
however slight, is an act of injustice, and n
wrong, and should not be committed. So
that we arrive at the conclusion, that either
the abstract question of Justice is not en-
bodied in these laws, and Is not comproinls-
cd by their repeal, or that the people of the
states of the Union have been perpetrating
through long wears a series of acts of lulus-
tice and wrong. That the former of these
conclusions is the correct one, we believe,
from the fact, that while good never does
nor even can arise from persistence in wrong,
it is not denied that good has grown out of
these exemptions, so far as they have gone;
and to such an extent that the popular mind
is now demanding further exemptions.
| This body has with great unanimlty pass
ed an act exempting 40 acres Of land with
the Improvements from forced sale. Sup
pose this act had been attempted ten years
since, il is not doubted that the some Ohlec-
tions would have been seriously urged Oh
the score of violation Of justice, as are
now urged against n further extension of the
principle. But at the present tinle the most
inveterate opponents of homestead exemp-
ton, urge no objection of that kind. 1t is
universally conceded that inasniuch as the
law is prospective in its action, aud all men
know its PROVISIONS, no one Is wronged
thereby. Certainly there can be no differ
ence in the principle of the measure enact
acted by this body. and that sought III the
prayer OF this petition. Tue difference u
simply in the fact that one has been matured
in the public mind, and the other is get in
great degree new.
If. then, no principle Of justice is to be Vi
olated by the enactment of the measure
sought, the question revolyes itself into one
of expediency and public policy; and in
this light we will proceed 10 examine It; and
This examinat. IN may be divided into three
heads:
Isl. The cost Of the collection laws.
2d. Their necessity, and effects.
ST. The effect of their repeal.
The fret subject Of inquiry here present.
ed. opens broader field Of investigation
than vonr committee desire TO occupy.--
They will content themselves with preseui-
ing a few prominent facts, which viii he
ample to call the public attention to the
enormous cost Of this machinery, aud tkcy
hone. 4et the minds Of those Interested to a
closer investigation Of The subject; maieri-
ais for hirb investigation 80 ahundauily
present themselves IN every ueighhorbood.
ln the outset, your committee 10 rot clam
iiat all the sums paid in to The support OF
the machinery of justice throughout the
land. are occa,ipnsd by the collection lave
but they Do believe, that certainly til.