The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1867-01-22
legislative Interference.

Legislative Interference.
They have "stay Law" in Texas. IL
ia inst announced in the New Orleans
papers that judgment similar to that de-
liyered here by Judge MEREDITH has
decided that law to be unconstitutional
and void. and for the same reasons. Judge
IRELAND, at the late session of the District
Court of Bastrop county, pronounced this
decision, "and directed the clerk of the
SCOUT to issue executions as though no
"such act had ever been passed" 1t would
be good thing if Legislatures would more
frequently bethink them that it is possible
to make illegal laws-laws which it is legal
to break, and illegal to enforce. No Par
lament, Congress, or Senate, or House, is
absolutely omnipotent; and legislator,
when he thinks he is making law, may be
really breaking the law Is completely as
any horse-thief.
Ms illegal to impair contracts between
man and man after those contracts are
made, and on one part fulfilled. And it is
not only illegal, but extremely mischievous,
in that it breaks down the confidence which
ought to reign between members of the
same community, destroys credit, para
lyzes enterprise, and gives to dishonest
debtors kind of vague hope of being at
last relieved by so kind Legislature from
the payment of their debts altogether. 1t
may be taken, as a general rule, that all
the class of legislative interferences with
contracts, whether prospective or retro
spective, benefit chiefly the rogues and
extortioners, and those who are "smart I"
enough to take advantage of the Difficult
ties of their neighbors to make profitable
bargains with them secretly.
Another bill of the same character is
that called the Homestead Bill. 1t is dis
tinctly a proposal to impair contracts by
taking away the security on which those
contracts were made and the main effect
of it upon those whom it designs to favor
would be to prevent any one from giving
them credit at all, save on terms so severe
and so ruinous that they would be speedily
worse off than before. For there is no
law of this nature that cannot be evaded.
Whether it be penal, like "usury" laws,
or merely restrictive, like this homestead
law, the rapacity Of lenders will break
through it, and the desperate necessities
of borrowers will help them. With re-
spect to usury" laws particularly, on
which our House of Delegates has un-
happily just pronounced very decisive
vote, the experience of all mankind has
long ago proven that such laws are not
only utterly powerless for their express OBJ
ject THAT would not alone be fatal OBJ
jection), but that their opaFation is uni
versally to increase practically the rate of
interest, and swell the gains Of the money
lenders. Because money lenders will have
the value of their money-which means
the value it will bring-and if you in
crease their risks and drive them to secret
bargains and exactions, whether in shape
Of commissions" or premiums, or ex-
orbitant profit on merchandise sold, they
will be sure to pay themselves for their
risks and for their money too.
But it seems in vain to urge these argu-
ments, or rather to point out these facts.
The old usury laws seem destined to be
fastened upon us for some time to come |;
yet it may not be too late to hope that our
Legislature will pause before committing
itself to complete system Of interference
with private contracts, such as has been
already inaugurated by the stay law, and
is proposed to be carried further by the
homestead bill. 1t is true that our coun-
try is at this moment in an exceptional
condition-in the agonies Of transition
between two systems of lsbor-and espe-
cially that many holders of land are, with
their families, reduced to grievous priva-
ton by the events Of the war and conse
quent scarcity Of money. We hope that
nobody will charge it upon those who OPP
pose this species Of legislation that they
oAV llfNuiCICub uulCChh6
suffering farmers. 1t would be as just on
our part to say that those who advocate
such laws are making political capital by
wandering to mistaken notions, whose re-
alisation they know would injure the
farmers rather than relieve them. We do
not say SO, and do not think so. The ques-
ton is one, first Of law, and secondly, Of
expediency; and 1t should be debated
courteously and dispassionateiy, with o
common view to the present and future in
terest of the whole community What We
maintain is, that stay laws and homestead
laws are Illegal a. impairing contracts, and
mischievous as destroying confidence, un-
dermining personal integrity, and making
future credit impossible-more especially
that ell penal laws against ausury," with
L 0uty axcanfi0s1, fucreasa the nrfnfs ~