The Kansas herald of freedom. [volume] (Wakarusa, Kan. Territory) 1854-1860, 1858-11-13
More Care Needed.

-.
January next, will be more careful in the
selection Of Engrossing and Enrolling
Clerks, than was the case with that body
last winter. Every act, almost, passed by
that Legislature, contains more or less
errors, some of SO grave nature as to
wholly deprive them of validity. "The act
to exempt certain property from execu-
ton and attachment" published on page
235 of the General Laws, is of this char
acter. The first section, is in these words:
"SEc. /. That homestead, consisting
of any quantity of land not exceeding
one hundred and sixty acres, and for agri-
cultural or horticultural purposes, and the
dwelling house thereon, and its appur-
tenances, to be selected by the owner
thereof and not included in any town
plot or city or village, or instead thereof,
at the option of the owner, a quantity of
land not exceeding one-half of an acre,
being within the plat of any town or city
or village, and the dwelling house there
on, with its appurtenances, owned and
occupied by any resident Of this Territory,
shall not be subject to forced sale or exc
cution, or any final process from any court,
for any debt or liability contracted at any
time before the passage of this Act"
1t is evident the word and, we have
italicised in the third line, should have
been USED, and the word before, in the last
line, should have been AFTER. But. by
the carelessness of the enrolling clerk,
and the oversight of the Legislature, the
above mentioned act, and all its subse-
quent provisions, are null and void. No
court would dare to assume the RESPONSE
bility of interpreting public statute
SO as to mean directly the opposite from
what the Legislature has plainly expressed.
And no court will acknowledge the power
of Legislative body to pass laws retro
speetive in their character, or which impair
the validity of contracts. The act in
question does this. The Supreme Court
of Pennsylvania, few years ago, met this
| indentical question, and settled the princi-
pie, SO far as that State is concerned; that
no Legislature can pass law exempting
property subject to levy and sale on exc
cution at the time debt was contracted,
from subsequent levy and sale. This same
principle has been held in all the States,
and so decided as often as the question
has been brought before the Courts
Judge Story says, very correctly
every statute which takes away, OF
impsirs vested rights acquired under e.
listing laws, or creates q new obligation,
imposes a new duty, or attaches a new
disability in respect to transactions or con-
siderations already passed, must be deemed
retrospective ,Oithin the prohibition" of the
federal Constitution.
If there was an ambiguity in the stat
ute alluded to, the courts would construe
it in accordance with the evident intention
of the law-making power; but in the case
under consideration there is no ambiguity
whatever, on the contrary it is as patent
as any language could express it
The Engrossing and Enrolling Clerks
should be lawyers, or men who have q
good general knowledge Of legal princi.
pies from careful study of the best au-
thorities. The idea that men who never
looked into a statute book, who know
nothing about the first principles of Law,
or who have only casually read them q
some men read novels, should undertake
to repeal, amend and frame new laws for
the government Of the people, and that
all the officers, including speakers and
clerks, should be men Of like character,
is simply preposterous. It is to sngaft
upon our already cumberous code another
series of acts like those of last winter,
everywhere defective from uncertainty; OF
by coming in collision with others which
no person can properly understand, and
no court intelligently interpret