The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1873-03-20
Mr.. Hughes on the New Bankrap'
q ssss49ss Law.

Mr.. Hughes on the New BallAi''i>'
we publish this morning h'sniy ih'e''
&; as,snc letter from Mr.. HUGHES giving MS COP
strucfion of the new bankrupt law. W
and that he agrees with us thai inc ne" ID"
q ,,1es l;sbonor the judgments and DEGREES oil
a. state eourts. He ayows that this act
& ,yas intended to accomplish two objects, the
se.nnd Of which was "to give the home
:. stead against debts secured merely by liens
&c Of Judgment or decree" Here is an admis-
sion that the new law is not explanatory
merely, but enacts new provision. Let Us
not lose sight of this admission. We shall
comment upon the letter in the order III
which we find points in it from which we
differ.
First, if the explanatory act, as MI
! NGaHEs likes to call it. were SIMPLY "o'c'u"'
3 tory.,' then we should coincide III his con-
.atruction of il. In that case the new act ana
the old one would have each 10 DC taken 10
.limit any construction which might be pu'
aupon either separately if that were the
aouly one in existence" But be expressly
saws elsewhere that the new law is an zen
actinso one. This admission settles that
point; for, this being the case, the new law
repeals any part Of the old law which con-
aicts with it. II it had been dccaratory
merely, it would not and could not have
done this. Here let US remark that We
guessed q little bit Of history which MI.
HuaHEs gives us in this letter. In our first
article on the subject OF the new bankrupt
law we said:
"Mr. Hughes knew that Congress was not
a judicial tribunal and therefore that its de-
claration that the law was intended to mean
so-and-so would not he respected by the
courts, that body having no earthly right to
constr,le its own laws, aud no judge who
has auv respect for himself ever looking 10
the Legislature to construe law for him,
and so he (Mr. Hughes) added to his bill the
additional words that SO-aud-So S'taN be as
7neoninq, all the judges and courts in the
land to the contrary Notwithstanding"
Now, we meant that Congress could not
change the meaning Of the OLD law by an
act declaratory or explanatory only. Mr.
HUGHES means the same thing. The law
was what Judge RIvEs had construed it to
be. Mr.. HUGHES desired TO have it,-not
explained, for the explanation would have
left it just as it was before,-but rccnactcd
( in new form, which would carry no mean
ing other than that which Mr.. HUGuEs
wished to put upon it. This was done.
The law was changed from What
Judge RIvEs had decided i: TO be.
II not, lie will not have to reverse bis
decision. We say, then, it was changed !;
and an tchdteCer respects al ucGs changed The
ne,c lac repeats The old lar. This simple
statement OF the case oyerthrows all Of Mr..
HuGaEss special pleading, which is all based
upon the assumption that the new law does
not operate repeal of inconsistent pro-
visions in the old law. If the new law Is
inconsistent with the old one, tie lattcr goes
by the board. The senior act will never
prevail. "The last will and the first deco"
pass the title to property, according to
BLACKSTONE; and this rule in this case may
be read, GThe last act of Il legislature always
prevails" II it were otherwise. the cXplalla-
HUGHES comedies, obligatory upon 10 court,
and the enactiny part being, as he contends,
liable to construction by the old law, the
new law would amount TO just nothing at
all. Mr. uUouEs will hardly maintain that
this is so.
Now, let us sec what the new law is. We
like to stick to the text:
"That the exemptions allowed the bank
rupt by the amendatory act should, and it is
hereby enacted they shall, be the amount al
lowed by the constitution and laws of each
State respectively Us existing in the year
1871; and that such exemptions be valid
against debts contracted before the adoption
and passage of such State Constitution and
laws, as well us those contracted after the
same, and against liens by Judgment or de-
cree of any State court, any decisions Of atty
such court rendered since the adoption ami
passage of such constitution and laws to the
contrary Notwithstanding"
If this act had stopped ut the figures
20 1871" Mr.. HUGuEs's construction would
be the right one. But it does not stop there
What is all the rest of ii for! He says to
save the exemptions As against liens by judg-
nent and decree Of State courts for debts, old
and new. Clearly, then, it will save these
exemptions us against all judgments and de-
crees included in the terms Of the act. What
Glasses of judgments and DEGREES are thesci
Why, all, without exception. 1t is Il new
law. 1t repeals the old law. We must in,
& clude all judgments and DEGREES OF all tue
State courts.
Now, then, the mechanic has a claim upon
the owner of q new house which he has just
built. How does he get it.? The State law
says:
aThe liens created by this act may be en-
: forced by motion, upon reasonable notice.
d in the county or corporation court" 1.-The
court having all the parties in interest before
it shall adjudge the right of the case in all
respects, and enforce The same bytts dccree.'
The new bankrupt law says this decree ;
shall not be enforced; that the bankrupt
shall hold his exemptions against ''iens by
judgment or decree Of any State court"
We imagine that master-builders and their
employees will not thank Mr.. HUouEs for the
new law.
Now,as to the Virginia homestead law.
That law provides that any judgment ren.
dere6 or docketed tor debt contracted even
previous to the 4tb day of April, 1866, shall
bea lien upon the homestead, ii the debt is
the purchase price Of the homestead, or the
wages of a mechanic or laboring man. In