Dallas herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1849-1873, 1869-04-03
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
GaII estom Term, 1850.
No. 3i29.
WALKER rs. DANT.

The petition in this case alleges
thht defendant, Dant, on the 3lst
January, 1860, executed his note
payable to plaintiff, in his capacity
of guardian of the minor, children
of James Walker, deccased, for the
sum of S1120 32, payable 1st July,
1860; that a judgment was obtain
ed on this note and that executions
issued thereon had been returned
not satisfied, and no property
found; and that the defendant in
the executions referred to pointed
out property. That defendant has
no property known 10 plaintiff OK
cept certain town lots claimed by
him as his homestead, which are
particularly described. That these
lots were conveyed to the wife Of
Dant on the 1st October, 1852, and
had never been occupied BY Daht
as homestead till after the matu-
rity of the Indebtedness of Dant to
plaintiff. That since that time de-
fendant has placed improvements on
the lots of the value Of seven thou
sahd dollats. The petition distinct
ly alleges that the Homestead is
community property Of Dant and
wife.
A demurrer was filed to the pcti-
tion-and sustained by the Cohrt-
and brought to this Court by ap-
peal.
The nineteenth century of the
Christian sra Hts not become more
distinguished for its arts and
sciences than for its laws for the
amelioration Of the human family.
From as far back in the past ages
of the world as the history of the
laws, usages and customs Of man
kind extends, down to tho present
generation of our race, those, who,
from any cause, either criminal,
speculative, or accidental, had be-
come unable to pay their debts,
were not only deprived of what
poor pttance they might happen to
have, but their peisons were subject
to imprisonment during the pleas
ure Of their creditors. Even ut
this day, there are distinguished
nations and States, portion of
whose citizens are lying in dun
gcoiis from no other cause than
poverty. a a
1t was great triumph in civil.
zation when the organic law Of D
State provided that 'ho person shall
be imprisoned for debit but a still
greater impetus was given to the
happiness of families when the Or
ganio law of State protected
homestead from the inroads of n
Sheriff. -.-ri- .gs
But while We thus bShst, wo are
in dahgef 6f taking the opposite
extreme. In avoiding the Scylla of
oppression, we must guard against
shipwrcck upon the Charybdis of
dishonesty. One extreme is apt to
be in close proximity with the op
posite. As the act to prevent frauds
and perjuries was once said to be
construed in such way and man
ner as to promote fraud, SO the
homestead provision of our consti-
tuition is liable to. be so construed as
TO take away tie homesteads of
honest credit9fs.
The 22d section of Article VII of
the Constitution of 1916, is as fol- I
lows
"The Legislature shall have pow
or to protect by law from forced
sales certain portion Of the prop
erty of all heads Of families. The I
Of family not to ex-
ceed two hundred acres of land (not
included in a town or city, or any /
town or city lot or lots.in value not
to exceed two thousand dollars,
shaD not be subject to forced sale.
For any debts hereafter contracted, .