The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1873-04-09

nro,yyision Ia itsssalist seelsen or such ex-
eniptioua ninstA ebts hsfstoto rsof hereafter
contraeEad. Actgsof GefteraI assembly OF
1Ss9-'7O, chapter1E. These provisions were
the produat ionss The one oftbe people OF the
State of Virginia, The other Of its State Legis-
lature. And the Supreme Court OF APP
peals of the Staie-the final arbitor OF the
force and construction Of 0 State law-has
decided that this homestead provision In
them Il Uofd'' Us regards antecedent debts,
because it Is prohibited peremptorily by the
Constitution of the United States. Tackett,
Ford g. Co. us. Stone, ed Grattsn. Void for
absolute want of authority in the people or
the Legislature ofthe State to enact suen ex-
,emption. And therefore that part OF Inc
State Constitution and law was as luopcfatiVe
and non-existing as If never put on paper.
Practically It may be questioned Whelner
that part of the Constitution and law OIL VIZ.
ginia was g existing in the year 1871, !" ana
whether it had any legal existence, being per
Sc void.nia.set>. II ...5tE-tj ,g'..L-
But Congress. in this act Of 1878, has at
tempted TO perform the functions OF State
legislature. and to reeaaCt State law DE-
cided to, be not then in existence. IL u.s.
sumes also the, functions of State Jud.cd.
t,re in everything the decision of the Court
|of. Appeals, and deciding that a State law Is
valid and operative which that court had
pronounced invalid and void, because the
Legislature was powerless to enact 1t. ri.
/ Can Congress do this legitlmateiy! a
Chm Congress give TO a State law, as such,
an operative effect which the Legislature, its
creator, was powerless 10 impart to IL
| Can Congress enact State law!
i Can it enlarge State law!
/ Can it rettre an extinct State law OF
validate one which is void!
+ If it can, from what part OF the Federal
Constitution does it get the authority!
II it cannot, how can the State homestead
law protect debtors estate against dntece'
dent debts by virtue of the United States
bankrupt law, when it could not do SO as
State act?
From another point of view we find that
the Constitution of the United States says
that State shall not make any law impair
ing the obligation of contract.
The Congress of the United States, In THIS
act Of 1878, says that State may may,
must make a law impairing the onilgatlon
of contracts existing ut the date OF its adop-
ton or enactment.
Which is to eoyprn2 How can Congress
SlUcIlOll WilaI luC boiiSiiluti'u Va ~ ="
States forbids? How can it validate what
the Constitution udcGtes ? ~ $751; "
No act Of Congress can give the debtor an
exemption under the State homestead act, as
such, greater than that act as State law can
give him; and its operative effect as State
law is finally ascertained by the decision OF
the Court of Appeals.
1t cannot be too often repeated nor too
steadily borne in mind that IN act OF Con-
gress cannot give to the enactment of state
legislature scope and operative effect
which it does not otherwise have, which
the body which enacted it did not give 1t,
and had no legitimate power to give 1t
that Congress is not a court with judicial
powers and Jurisdiction to oyerrule the dccl-.
sions of State court constituting its local
State laws. ......
These things can no more be done by an
act OF Congress than they could be done by
an act of the Legislature of sister State.
In my opinion, there is nothing IN the
general bankrupt law, nor in any act amenda'
tory or declaratory of it, which can give or
secure TO the bankrupt an exemption under
the Virginia homestead act against any debt
contracted before the adoption Of the State
Constitution. .........
How far the act of Congress of 1873, IN
overriding the previous adtudications OF
Stale courts of competent Jurisdiction, is H.
valid, rs being erpost tdcto, and for other
reasons, is further question of gravity and
moment, joins nj. ORR.
1871 #.@ TeeShllrg Va,