The Orangeburg news. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1867-1875, 1869-10-09


dict with tho provision of the Constitu-
tion Of the United States
This was the opinion of Judge Dcnio
of New York, aud of Judge Putnam of
Massachusetts,, and was the decision of
the Supreme Court of Michigan. y
The Supreme Court of Georgia, has
decided in recent case, that the ex.
emption of u homestead of the value of
$4,000, authorized by the Constitution
of that State, from levy and sale, even
for anteccdent debts: liens and judgments
is valid and does not impair the obliga.
tion of contracts. The Supreme Court
of the United States has admitted that
claws may be passed by tho State lcgis-
latures exempting tools or hosehold
goods from levy or sale under existing
contracts"
Judge Orr argues that eff the princi-
pie is once admitted that property may
be exempted, the enactment is not un-
constitutional which simply cnlargcs the
amount of property SO exempt" and
'that the Homestead Exemption is as
constitutional as the old scow and bed
law of this State"
The Statute Of Limitations, the In.
solvent Debtors Act, the Act abolishing
Imprisonment of debtors, all these are
upon the same principle of generous hu-
manity to the debtor and for the good of
the State aud ali these are recognized
as constitutional then why should this
homestead exemption whose humane pro-
vision will cheer and bless thousands of
beggared families, and save the widows
aud the little ones Of our gallant and
heroic dead from poverty, and crime,
why should this be overrulcd and rem
dered null, under the plea of its uncon-
stitutionality!
"All contracts arc made with full
knowledge of the parties that the law
making power may modify the remedy"
Chief Justice Marshall said: with
out impairing tho obligation of the ecn-
tract, the remedy may certainly be modi-
fed, as the wisdom of the nation shall
direct"
The wisdom and policy and veal of
the State certainly directs that this hu-
name provision should be carried out
and enforced.
Judge Orr, also assumes the position
that South Carolina was not under the
protection and governancc of the Consti-
tuition of the United States, at the time
OF the ratification of the Constitution of
1868, and the Supreme, Court of the
United States has decided that State
laws passed prior to 1798,-the date of
the ratification ofthe ConstitutioR-im
pairing the obligation of Contracts, were
valid, as the Constitution prior TO that
time did not exercise any limit to State
legislation.
No damage is done by this law to the
creditor. BY the decision that this law is
constitutional, his mortgage is good, is
recognized but subject to the condition
that the defendant shall enjoy a home
stead, in accordance with the Copstitu.
ton and laws of this State. And this
modification of the creditors remedy ia
for the good of the public, and the State,
in the cause of high, and holy human
ity.
1t is maxim of general acccptation,
Fiat justifea, ruat coelum. "Let Justice
be done though the heavens fall" ,ut
when Justice can be done in accordance
with the dictates of humane mercy,
and for the well being of the community,
we say let it be done in this way.
In conclusion regarding this law as
wise and beneficial, We hope that the