The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1853-03-09
OF rKkourxx~s,
on THE HOMEsTE sD BILL.



House Of Commons. Frid-y. Dee. 10, lsss.
propose to discuss this messur
briefly. TO clear away " possible. SOM
at the objections TO IT, The only ar
gument l have heard urged against il
as matter Of legal policy. is that suci
law as this bill proposes would tend
10 the creation Of perpefuities. Bul
this objection can have little weight. il
our present system Of landed policy es
cape the same censure The Feudalsys-
tenn, from its first introductio into our
mother Country, whose laws of real es-
tate form the basis particulsrly ' Of those
Of North Carolina. down TO this time. is
one vast web Of perpetuities. One oi
It's most marked pecu'iarities was the
absolute inability Of the vassai to make
any disposition whatever Of his frud
without the consent uf his lord. And
though the system AZ this time is strip
ped Of its most bardensome incidents.
such was the tenaeity with which IL
held It's grasp. that every relaxation Of
ITS desperate hold cosA the work Of ages
to effect, and every concession IL made
was wrung from its fears by the hazard
OF a revolution. Even now, when the
demands Of commerce require the
greatest facility to the exchange and
transfer Of property Of every descrip-
tion. the Intervention Of a Court Of law
is necessary to give legal sanction to
transfer Of land. and q lease for q
few years only requires for its validi.
ty the solemnlties ofa deed. Probably
one third oil all the land in the State j.
in the hands Of wards or cIogged
with the letters of coverture; to obtair
title to which in one instance month,
must elapse. and in the other a liis
time. And as to the other portion
though there be no hindrance to it.
alienation in the hands of its owners
each one Of these at his death may e,
its settlement in a given course, indc'
pendent Of the wants and convenience
Of the grantees or devisees, for a life
or lives in being and twenty one year.
afterwards, period that may exhaust
half century. The policy Of the Feu.
dal system was not to make the land
Of the country floating capital to en-
ter into the exigencies Of trade, or ;
medium to humor the caprices Of th'
commercial world. That system wise
ly judged that this species Of propert,
is the conservative element arouni
which to rally the patriotism Of tn
subject, and that the influences Of hom
and its associations are the stronges
hold upon his services and loyalty; an
it has ever been unwilling to forego il
dominion over real property, and jeal
Gus Of interference in its disposition
by foreign power. A man may pos
sess any amount Of personal estate i
one County, aud reside in another. an,
the 1aw.ofhis domicil is the law tina
regulates the disposition Of that chatts
interest after his death. But with Ian
tits different; the law Of its localit
governs It. and claims exclusive an
absolute jurisdiction over its dispos
ton. Under such system we live
no other would give permanent donir
nion toa nation over its own realm, {
secure to the individual the benefit ,
so large loIdship over his possessions
Then, instead Of this feature being a
oblectio to the bill before US, BY in
Producing new notions or new rule
into the landed policy Of the State.
I only harmonizes with the principle
already established by the acquiesenc
of ages, and should command our al
miration on that account. This mea
iure does not create any new letters
she alienation of land, it only extend
the difficulty Of transfer, already e,
isting. to a few contingent cases. A
ter man shall have availed himself ,
its provisions, he can ALLEVIATE as read
ly as betore, SO long as he remain VI
married, and even after that event, ii
experience Of every day will c0nvins
US that in vast majority Of cases, Il
assent of the wife goes with the wisht
of the husband and is in reality no b;
to alienation. 1t is true that the po
tion given by this law to each nan ma
not be forced from him by the compu
sorry terms of an execution, but in h
hands it still is. free to answer eve
purpose TO which he may see ftto a
ply it.
Having disposed of this argument.
proceed to answer another objection
this bill; that is. that it will dimini
the security for debts. and that cred
tors.will be exposed to great loss
its enactment. This objection is co
jectural, it is not drawn from exper
ence, and it is supported only on spe
ulation, since the measure has not be,
tested amongst us. Were il design.
to diminish the security to debts a
ready contracted, then as violating Il
obligation of contracts. this bill wou
be unjust and even unconstitution;
But debts already existing bind 4
, whole property Of the debtor IN as al
i pie degree as If this bill should n
Be enacted i4ts . law, AID -