Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1848-12-29

anu iooh'hS 10 speedy success policy dictates the
adoption of principles such as these
----
"In l775 there were in England $50 900 landed
prOprietors in cape, who reduced in 1917 to
10000, and now they do not exceed 10000. In
Scotland there are only 1900. and in ireland
6,44l land owners in capite, so that it may be said
l0,4l4, sway power over 80, 600 900 persons"
The above article contains food for reflection and
argument. 1t is contended that we are exempt
from the evils of land monopoly because we have
no laws of entail in our land. If the laws of entail
have any power at all, they should operate to pre-
vent land monopoly, for how estates concen-
trate, that by the law of entail are secured to the
families forever. But estates have, concentrated
which proves simply, that in opposition to the ncv-
liable laws of our present social and commercial
ations the laws Of entail have 10 force; consequent
ly, the argument that need not fear these evils
because of the absence of these laws, has force.
Experience, too, proves this for the statistics of
vcra states of the Union, show, that whilst the po-
pulaon has increased, the number of nd-ho.ders
has decreased, which could not be the case were
the argument valid. In our present relations. ca
pta will absorb the soil, and nothing can prevent
II
done it, and thirty millions of people are the slaves
of twenty thousand. If it be argued that we have
no right to restrict the quantity of land a man may
own, we would ask, if we may not, whilst free,
make provision for remaining so. Had the people
of Great Britain no right to guard their freedom
Is it right that twenty thousand shall be the slave
of one, and have the twenty thousand no right to
prevent it? If so, repubicansm is but foolish
dream, and our revolution and all our subsequent
civil and military struggles, have been but idle eff
forts that have end except in such dcspotism
now brushes Great Britain. 1t is preposterous
to contend that we have no right to prevent these
evils. we have any right whatever to life or IL
berty, then we have right to guard them. Ger
tanly the right of the mass to guard themselves
against oppression is as great as the right of the
few to Cypress them.
IL If homestead exemption be an unjust and
mpolitic act, why would it not be both Just and po
lite to enact that every man shall have a home of
his own. for is it not just wrong for man TO live
in rented house and contract debts, TO live in
an exempted house aud contract debts. If trade,
commerce and business generally, demands that the
man who owns house shall hold it only subject to
execution, the good policy demands that eve
ry man shall own house for if but one half of
community own houses subject to execution, trade
reaps but half the benefit it would provided all were
compelled to own houses under the same crcum-
But it is impracticable, if not impossible
say you, TO compel every man to house. So
II is b1t when II is horne i'm mind that those
emption laws not retroactive in their character
that they have no application to debts contracted
before they take effect, why, let ask, should the
occupant of house he owns be put upon differ
ent footing from the occupant of a house he rents
II a creditor suffers wrong injustice from the
fact that his debtor owns no house, does he suffer
any from the fact that instead of not owning,
his debtors house is exempt. The whole thing
rests on this basis. Credits voluntary. Wheth-
er a man owns one house or hundred, or whether
he owns forty, it is entirely optional with
the individual of whom he seeks credit to grant it
not. There is no law compelling him to give
credit. He is at liberty to investigate all the chan
ces of payment, and do precisely as he pleasas in
the premises. If then, under such circumstances,
demand thai he shall tax the whole community to
employ third party TO set him right. Credits be-
ing entirely voluntary, justice places payments ON
the same basis; and the question in exemptions is
not of justice, but simply Of expedeney. This be-
ing the case, all experience heretofore has pro-
we'd exemptions beneficial, we have little doubt that
all experience hereafter will prove the same thing.
until the ultimate of the principle the repeal of the
collection laws, be obtained.
Bu. there is class OF peop.e or profession, who
consider themselves in the operation of law Of this
character, as an exception TO the general rule We
allude TO physicians for, say they, we are COM
PEELED to give credits. II man demands our ser
vices, the moral seuse of the community compels
us TO attend TO his demands, and hence the law
should protect Us. We cannot see the force of this
logic on the contrary, we draw very different
conclusion fcom the premises. The same moral
sense which would not Justify physician in per-