The Fairfield herald. [volume] (Winnsboro, S.C.) 1849-1876, 1869-10-06

elusive of the poilt raised. But Con
gress did not assume (as is asserted
to make the Constitution Of this State
AN act of Congress Read the act
NV., uuited States Statutes, p. 73
and nothing can be found therein in
tho slightest to Justify the assumption.
The preamble rccites that "shereas
tho people Of South Carolina have
framed constitution Of State govern.
mcnt that is republican,
therefore, bo it enacted that Carroll
na shall be entitled to representation
in Congress" Aftor all the stress
that has been laid upon the action of
Congress, those who read the act will
be surprised to find that there is moth
ing else in it bearing at all upon this
question. What, now, did Congress
enact? Nothing beyond allowing this
State representation. And suppose we
call the preamble an enactment, then
what follows7 Why, that the consti-
tuition is repub'icunl Nothing more.
Will any judge pretend that any legal
enactment is covered by tho word
"republicau z" Or to come more
closely down, that this sanctions the
homestead clauses.
Suppose, however, that Congress
had enacted, (as is assumed without any
foundation, i'll fact.) that the Cynsti
tuition Of South Caroline should have
the force of an act Of Congress. This
would not sustain homestead provis-
ion antagonis,ic to the Constitution Of
the United States, for the constitution
of 1868 itself provides that nothing
In 1T Gin cOntravention of subvcrsion
Of tho Constitution of the United
States can have any binding force"
(Arliclc |, section 4, and the "oath,"
article II, section 30) Let us hear
no more about Congress having given
authority to measure which is so di-
rcctly in contravention of the Cunsti-
tuition Of Uuited States.
But mirubVe diciu, the Constitution
of South Carolina does not make re.
Irrespective homestead provision I
challenge any one to point out the
clause. Article |, section 20, and ar
ticle II, section 32, make no provision
that the exemption is to apply to an.
fcccdent Indebtedness. Authorities
can be cited, ad nauScan,, that in The
| construction Of the constitutional or
statute law, all provisions are presum-
ed to be prospectivc, unless the contra
ry be expressly enacted,
Neither secession, then, Congress or
the constitution of 1868, authorized
retrospective homestead law. Nothing
now left but the naked act of OH
September, 1869, XIV Stats, p. l9.
The provisions Of that act are retro.
| spective.
The act of 1868 at once falls as i'm
pliring the obi cation of cortracts, by
virturo of tho prohibition of the Uni
ted States Constitution, and by the
prohibition of our own constitution of
1868 CART. I, scction2l)
Do we hear any one bold enough -
say that IA retrospective homestead ex-
emption does not impair the obligation
Of contracts, and is not violativc Of the
Constitution Of the United States? If
81, We merely reply by citing the de-.
eision Of the United States Supreme
Court, (Which is binding upon our
judges,) } in the case of the Planters'
! Bank VI. Sharp, wherein, after decid-
ing (as quoted by one of the judges)
that States can pass laws exempting II
homestead and tools, &C., the court
makes this qualification, which, VIC
think, ought not to be overlooked, !,
having slight bearing upon the qucs-
ton. "ASain, State insolvent laws,
if mado like this law, to apply to past
contracts, and stop suits on them, have
been held not 10 be constitutional, eX-
cept SO far as they discharge the per-
son from imprisonment. When so
restricted, they do not impair the obi.
CATION of the contract itself, because
the obligation Of tho contract is left
in full force and actioDablc aud future
property, as we'll as present, subjected
to its payment. Where future acqui-
sitions arc attempted to be exonerated
and the discharge extended to the
debt or contract itself, if done by
States, it must not, as here, apply to
past contracts, or it is held to impair
taoir obligation" This case, then,
goes TO the extent of not only not al
lowing an exemption to be made Of
property which a debtor o'ens, but not
even of what he may hcreyler acquire
rs affecting F'past contracts" This
extract from the case will be found in
6 Howard, page 328, where tho court
sustains itself by ten authorities.
Let us not tampcr with tho law and
JUSTICE.
The Great Eastern is The great ca
bio layer, and nov, having done such
good service III the Atlantic, she is