The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1874-06-06
VOL. XLVI.
this decision, on the Sd March, 1873, Con.
gress passed another act in the following

words:
"Bc ii enacted, &C., That it was the true
intent and mcsninS Of an act approved June
:, 1872. entitled, &c, that the exemptions al.
lowed the bankrupt by the said amendatory
act should aud it is hereby enacted that they
shall hc tlc amount allowed by the Consti.
tuition and laws Of each State respectively rs
existing in the year 1871: and that such eX-
cmNtionS be valid against debts contracted
before the adoption aud passage Of such State
Constitution and laws, rs we'll AS those con-
tractrd after the same, and against liens by
judgment or decree OF any State court, auy
decision Of any such court rendered since
the adoption and passage OF such Constitu-
ton aud laws TO The contrary notwitlStand-
iuC."
The first question which presents itself for
our consideration is whether the act Of 1878,
in so far rs it seeks, in the administration of
the bankrupt law, to give an effect to the
exemption laws OF a State different from
that Which is given by the State itself, is
constitutional.
Congress has power to establish uniform
laws on the subject Of bankruptcies through
out the United States" Constitution art. L.,
see. s.. 4 bankrupt law, therefore, to be con-
S,itutioual must be uniform. Whatever
rules ii prcsclihcS for one il must for all. 1t
must be uniform i'll its operations. not only
within State. but within and among all
the States Ii il provides that property eN-
cmpt from execution shall be exempt from
assignment in one State. it must in all. If it
specially sets apart for the Use Of the
bankrupt certain property. or certain
amounts of property in one State, without
regard to exemption laws. il must do the
same in all. II it provides that certain kinds
Of property shall not be assets under the
law in one place, it must make the same
provision for every other place within which
it iS 10 have effect.
The power 10 except from the operation
Of the law property liable TO execution under
the exemption laws of the several States. rs
they were actually enforced. was at one time
questioned upon the ground that IL was a
violation Of the constitutional requirement
Of uniformity, but it has thus far been SuS-
tanned, for the reason that it is made rue
Of the law, to subject to the payment Of
debts under its operation only such property
is could by judicial process be made availa-
hle for the same purpose. This is not un-
Just. aS every debt is contracted with refer
encc 10 the rights of the parties thereto
under existing exemption laws, and no Gre
ditor can reasonably complain if he gets bis
full share of all that the law, for the time
being, places at the disposal Of creditors.
One of the effects of 4 bankrupt law Is that
of Il general execution issued in favor OF all
the creditors OF the bankrupt, reaching all
his property subject to levy, and applying
it 10 the pay ment OF all his debts according
TO their respective prlorltleS. ltiSqulte pro-
per, therefore, to contiue its operation 10
such property as other legal process could
reach. \ rule which operates to this effect
throughout the United States is uniform
within the meaning Of that term, as used i'll
the Constitution.
The act Of 1878 goes further, and excepts
from the operation Of the assignment not
only such property as was actually exempted
byvirtue ofthe exemption laws, but more. 1t
does not provide that the exemption Laws rs
they exist shall be operative and have effect
under the bankrupt law. but that in each
State the property specified in such laws,
whether actually exempted by virtue thereof
or not. shall be excepted. 1t in effect de-
, clareS by lis own enactment, without regard
| to the laws of the States, that there shall be
one amount or description of exemption in
| VIRGINIA and another in Pennsylvania. In
| this we think ii is unconstitutional, and
| therefore void. 1t changes existing rights
between the debtor and the creditor. Such
changes, to be warranted by the Constltu-
| ton, must be uniform in their operation.
| This is not. The consequence Is that the act
of 1872 remains unchanged, Notwithstanding
| its attempted amendment in 1873.
| The act Of 1872 gives effect to the cNemp-
| ton laws of Virginia Us they existed in 1SI l.
| The particular law under which the bank
rapt in this case claims his exemption, was
| passed in 1870: it does not apply to contracts
made or debts incurred previous to the time
the new Constitution went into effect. Tha;
certainly was not before July 6, 1869, and
the debts due TO Smith, Wanderlnk aud
Schindel. were all incurred previous to that
| date. That of Smith dates from the time the
| note was given upon which his Judgment was
rendered. that Of Schindel from the making
| of the contract out of which the indebtedness
arose. and that Of Wanderlink from the time
| of the execution of the note which he holdS'
| As against these creditors the bankrupt Is
not entitled 10 the benefit of the exemption
| The claim of Roberts l. Co. requires Us &c
| determine ut what time the Constitution, j.
far as it relates to the provision in question
took effect. 1t is claimed by the bankrupt
that this was on the 9th July, 1860, wheu
the Constitution was ratified by the people,
| and bv the creditors, that it was postponed
| until the 2Gth Of January, 1870, wien the
act was approved admitting the State to re-
| presentation in Congress. The contrac'
| upon which Roberts & Co. base their cia'h
| was made, as has been seen, on the latQ o.
November, 1869.
This Constitution was adopted in accord
ance with the provisions of the reconstruc
| ton acts OF Congress. These acts provided
| in substance that when the people OF tn
rebel States should have formed IL conStitu
| ton N conformity with the Constitution o
the United States, and should have don'
certain other things named, such STATE
| should lie entitled to representation IN Con
| prcss. 1t was also further provided tha
! until the rtaop!e of any Of such States should
| be bv law admitted to representation II
! Congress. any civil government which mlgh
! exist thcrein should be deemed PROVISIONS
! only, and in all respects subject TO the para
mount authority of the United States, a
any time to abolish, modify, control, or SUI
persede the same.
| In pursuance Of these acts, conventlol
| dplv elected assembled in Richmond on tht
80 december. 1867. and proceeded forthwith
TO frame IA constitution, which was certiheC
! to Congress as aeq,lired by law, and there
upoia an act WAS passed by Congress and ap
proscd on the 1sth of April. 1869, authorlz
| inc It's sllbmissiua to a vote OF the people
and an election OF the State officers provided
for and Of members Of Congress. Ehe same
act pros ided that & the Constitution should
/ be ralised at such election, the Legislature
/ OF the State thea elected should assemble al
ahc capitol of the State on the fourth Tues
| 4 >lT,nf