Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1868-02-27
THE HOMESTEAD LAW.

The Convention, in Charleston, has incorporated
in the new Constitution an article that should have
been in the old one, and part Of the organic law
of every State that is the Homestead clause, ex-
empting one hundred acres of land and personal
property to the value of $500, from levy and sale.
1t is necessary feature in every government, the
object of which is to protect its citizens in times OF
adversely. The present suffering condition Of the
country is argument sufficient in favor of such leg
islation; and it was a culpable oversight in our
legislators that failed to perceive the importance
of such law, in times of prosperity, as wise
preparation for unseen adversities.
But theirs is political deception intended and
perpetrated, in the matter of this homestead ex-
emption, now Incorporated in the Constitution.
The late Alabama election has, in its disastrous re-
suits to the Reconstruction Constitution of that
State, shown the Convention men in Charleston,
that their scheme of Constitution making, might,
after all, be repudiated by the people Hence, it
was necessary to incorporate in their instrument,
some popular feature like this, to ensure to it the
favor of the white voters. As relief, SO much
needed in fact, would, at this time be exceedingly
popular with all classes, the Homestead clause is
the bid for favor to the Constitution Unfortu.
natey for these Constitution n-naKers, however, the
Act of Congress under which they are called to-
gether, requires the adoption Of republican form
of Government, not repugnant to the Constitution
of the United States. That Constitution declares
that: "No State shall pass any er post tacto
law, or any law impairing tie obligation of con-
tracts; plain and forcible words not easily misun-
derstood, even by minds unaccustomed to constru-
ing laws The Convention, if it is anythingat all,
is nothing more thanthe sovereign body of State,
and can no more go beyond the provisions of that
Constitution, than a Legislature could. 1t is
plain, therefore, that Convention of State can
not annul the Constitution of the United States.
This Homestead clause is an apparent attempt to
do that very thing so far as its retrospective bear
ing is concerned. It may stand good as to future
contracts as long asthc instrument lasts but it can
not have an &c post facto bearing and can give no
present relief The Courts cannot recognize its
validity as to existing obligations.
The deceptive part of this performance arises
from the fact that the members of the Convention,
evinced, in the discussion of the subject knowl-
edge of the ineficency of the proposed relief but
have nevertheless, put forth the clause, in artful
disguise, as bait to draw voters to the polls on
the day of election.
If Congress were to adopt general homestead
exemptions its constitutonality would be question
able 4; although it would appear that ifno State
could pass such law, the Congress of all the
States might Similar wording covers the validity
of the legal tender Act, and it is even yet some
what doubtful whether or not greenbacks are a
legal tender. We advise our readers to beware Of
such cheats, and not vote for the Constitution
solely because it contains q homestead exemption.