The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1867-02-05

stead which NIT be valus5G the he
Tors were Ten fntact under ne prot " ION
of the stay Law. The nan D familyIesuia
no sold ont within fvs d~aystAder tne Writ
oS A. fa..-brft the bachelor was sheisered-
quietly under the stay law. he coula NJ
most suspect the gentleman OF o conspifA-
CIV In favor ofthe bachelors! ~
Mr.. CRUMP intimated bis disposltlon ~
favor q iudicious homestead law: one .nas
the courts would recognize. he alicdeu
to the action Of Congress on the Dankrupt
law, in the course Of which the rfght Oh tno
States to enact q Homestead Aw was gene,
rally admitted, and . clause was inserted
in the. bill exempting the property e31
emitted under the laws OF the STATES re-
spectiveiy. He expressed his qualification
at this. Mr.. CRgNR concluded by express
ing his hope that the House would vote
down this bill, and pass one that might be
considered.a boon, and. not o bane, for the
poor debtor. ,sq
Mr.. SEAwEfL advised that the better
course would be not to vote down the bill,
but to amend it and make it such as he
House could pass. Expressing his salts
faction that Mr.. CRuMP indicated his desire
for a reasonable bill, he hoped he would
unite in this course Mr.. SEAwELL re-
ferred to Mr.. GARNETT's proposition to the
House that if his bill was not satisfactory
they should make it so by amendment.
Mr.. CRUMP said there was not q stock In
any clause of the bill upon which to graft
an amendment. Abiding to the several
propositions, and the difficulty Of amending
them in the House, he moved their CON-
mitment to the Committee OF Courts OF
Justice with instruction to report o Dill
preserving q homestead to housekeepers
and heads of families, but Withdrew the
motion to allow Mr.. SEAwELL to proceed.
Mr.. SEAwELL argued that the Committee
of Courts of Justice was crowded Win
business. The House could perfect the
bill without that expedient, which would
only produce delay. -.
Mr.. GARRETT questioned the friendship
of Mr.. CRUMp for the debtors when ne pro.
posed to send the bill to the Committee OF
Courts of Justice, Notwithstanding his cher
objection to it, as he himself had intimated,
could be removed by the insertion OF tour
words. making the valuation OF estates &C
cordjng TO that of 1860. To send the bill
TO the committee would be fatal. The
bill to which his was a substitute had
been sent to the committee, and what did
they do ? They kept it a long time, n
%reported it back with the recommendation
that " it do not pass" Send it back to that
committee, audit would stay there till judg-
ment day. If that be the friendship OF the
gentleman, he might well say with the old
adage, "Save me from my friends, and
will take care Of my enemies" II the
gentleman (Mr. CRuMP) would give the
aid of his legal learning and ability, they
could easily amend the bill IN the House
without sending it to the committee.
Mr.. GARRETT, urging the House TO 40
something for the reliefof the debtor class,
alluded feelingly to their condition. lie
portrayed the sad fates of those elderly
gentlemen who were forced to give up the
homes that had descended to them through
generations, now to pass to the possession
of strangers. Those who retained them
vet would not continue to do so at the ex-
pense of honor and of justice, yet they
should not be forced to surrender them II
a proper measure of this General Assem-
blv could prevent it. He implored gen.
tlemen not to reject the bill, but to con-
slider it and amend it from day to day un-
til it was perfected.
Mr.. u. TURNER was a friend of justice
and laws of the land, and not the especial
friend of any class against another. lie
was for sending the bill back to the COM
mittee, that it might be made less OBJ
noxious. He questioned the power OF tire
Legislature to pass a bill having retro
spective action such as this bill proposed.
He had heard no authority quoted for this
feature of the bill.
j. Then the bill only provided for creditors
having liens upon the property. 1t made
no provision for creditors in general.
The gentleman from Stafford (Mr. HANS
BRoUGH) was wise in coming to the conclu-
sion that this bill was to make him a lord of
the manor. Mr.. TURNER had heard of an
amendment to be offered to it providing
that where a man had not the property ex-
emptcd in the bill, the State should pro-
vide it for him!
As to the bachelors, Mr.. TURNER could
only say that if the bill conferred any bene-
fits on them, they had never made any
appeal to this House for them. For HIM
self, he had given proofin his ten gears OF
q bachelors life of bis ability to take care
of himself. He continued further to oppose
the bill and approve q motion to recommit.
Mr.. CRUMP renewed his motion to COM
NIT to the Committee of Courts of Justice
with instruction to report a bill for the
preservation of homesteads for household
ers and heads of families.
Mr.. GARRETT moved to insert the words
" retrospective as well as prospective" al
ter the word "bill."
Mr.. CLARK, of Campbell, objected to the
amendment. He indicated his approval of
a homestead bill, but did not wish the Lee
gislature to pass an Illegal one, as he con-
sidered any bill having this retrospective
action would be.
Mr.. CRuMP again briefly criticised the
bill of the gentleman from Essex. In the
course of his remarks he expressed q doubt
as to the constitutionality of the retro
spective feature. Yet if it appeared upon
examination that it was not so, he would
help to pass a bill with this feature in it.
He would go for a bill that was confined
within "judicial limits"
Mr.. EVANS suggested that the House
should make test question upon the word
Retrospective" and its vote would be
instructive to the committee.
Mr.. WATKINS hoped the House would
make no such test. The question of the
power Oh u Legislature W pass IeToSPeC-
tue homestead bill had never yet been adj
Indicated. He apprehended that when
decided it would probably be against the
power; but until such time he was de-
cidedly for giving his constituents the
benefit of a doubt. He exclaimed against
this House undertaking to decide hurriedly
q question which a Marshall would take a
recess TO consider. The sovereign people
were demanding a homestead bill, and he
boped the subject would be committed to