The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1874-02-19
Important Decisions in United States
District Court.
JUDGE HUGHES DECLARES SiR-
GINIA STATUTE ALLOWING
WAIVER OF TOME>TEAD
EXEMPTION USCON-
STITUTIONAL.
THE JUDGE RIPPING OPEN AS
SIGNEES' ACCOUNTS.
,ow THE PEOPLE WE'RE pLUNDERED
,xomcstenG Exemptions In Another
Aspect.

lIurhcs on Yesterday rendered. scfeIa! itu-
portant decisions. which we give IN iull ne'
| low. |: will be seen that he decides inat Tue
net of the General Assembly OF Virginia,
passed 3uue -. 1870, allowing q waiver OF
| the homestead exemption. is uncons'isu1lonai'
| In another case lie pays bis respects 10 an
assignee in bankruptcy, disaloWing many
| nu,r4ocous charges on the assets Of bank
runt We doubt not this is but the begin
! ninr of tho good work Judge Hughes Will
perform in his Investigations into the con-
| duct of those who have so reckleSsly plum
| tercd tie people. In 4 third case he de.
| cl,rcs that the homestead exemption is good
against general judgment for debt:
| IN ne matter Of Joseph Solomon, Bank
-,,t.--ln this case Gibson & Crilly, of Balti-
more creditors OF the bankrupt, resist, by
peti,iou, the allowance Of the homestead eX-
| e,nn,ion. This debt is evidenced by neSo-
table note for 1886 S3, the payment OF
| which woald be defeated by the allowance
| of the homestead. They claim that their
debt is good against the homestead, because
| the note bears Oh its face these words: 4" l
hereby waive the benefit of the homestead
exemption rs TO this debt" They refer to
the act of the General Assembly of Virginia
| uasSed June 9th, 1870, which authorizes the
maker Of a note to waive the homestead eX-
emction, and provides that in such case the
prouerty of the debtor shall be liable to be
Subjected, under legal process, for such
| deot.
| The ONLY question presented for decision
| by their petition is, whether a court OF bank
ruDtcv in Virginia. where this note was
dated aud executed, will exempt the home
stead as against the debt it evidences, not
| withstanains the statutory waiver which it
bears, for reason of the uncOnslitutlonallty
| of the act of Assembly Of June -, 1870.
The 1lth article Of the State Constitution,
| in its 1St section, eXemptS the homestead to
| a householder, &C.. EXCEPT III certain eases,
of which this negotiable note is not one.
In its 7th section it provides that the pro-
visions of this Qlth) article shall be con-
strucd literally, so that all its intents may
be fully and perfectly carried out.
In its Sd section it provides that the Cen
cral Assembly shall prescribe in what man.
uer and on what conditions tie householder
| shall set apart and hold, for the benefit OF
himself and family, the homestead in any
property; and it enacts that 'this section
Shall no, be construed as authorizing the
General Assembly to defeat or impair the
benefits intended to be conferred by the pro.
visions OF this Q1th) article" This is the
ONLY section of the Constitution which can
be claimed TO authorize the act of Assembly
Of June ~, 1870 section Sd.
Clearly. the power here given to prescribe
how the homestead shall be held by the
householder /" for the benefit Of himself and
his family" does not contain power to
,rdire and destroy tie homestead. This
would lie true without other words in the
section. But the intention Of the Constitu-
!, ton is placed beyond doubt by the con
gliding words Of this 9TH section, which cX'
prvsSy enact that the power given Ill the
body of the section shall not be construed
to embrace any power to "dcieat or Impair -
the benefits Of the homestead. The act OF
Assembly passed June -, 1870, section 81,
allowing the homestead TO he defeated Dl
4 waiver of il il the body of bond, note
or contract. is in violation Of the State Con-
stitu,ion, and cannot be allowed any force or
effect by this court TO defeat the holneslcads
OF bankrupts.
AS if apprehending just such legislation
the Constitution itcrates its injunction to the
courts. directing liberal construction Oft:
provisions, securing the homestead eXemp
ton.
The petition Of the creditors, Gilmer an(
| Crinv. i. dismissed, and their claim for th'
| payment of their debt in prejudice of the
homestead exemption is dsallowed.
ssow tho Assets Of Bankrupts are
Swallowed Ep-Judge Hughes Stop
ping Leaks.
In The matter Of William II. BagadU
| Bankrupt The bankrupt alleges that he i:
in the true sense Of the word bankrupt, II
a helpless and hopeless condition, entirely
dependent upon the justice of the court
He complains bitterly of the manner IL
which the assets of his estate have been ad
ministered by the assignee.
| The total sum realized from these assets
. was ST ,401. Lien creditors were paid tC
+ the amount Of S5G4S3. The exemption mo
ney allowed the bankrupt was $500, but o
this $3.50 was intercepted for an attorney
fee. All the rest of the fund, S536.l7, Wa
paid in costs aud fees, except the sum o
S49. Is retained Gin the hands Of the assignee
to meet other expenses"
The summation of results is as follows :
Amount realized from assets. 81 ,401 OF
Amount paid bankrupt....... sl50 99
Amount paid lien creditors.. @ SSSf Sof 9S22
): Amongst others the aSsignee's charges art
| as fellows:
/. For auctonecrs' commissions for SELL :. q,
iug...................... Sa i o;
For For assirnsc,s c,iumIssions ON *i4oi 50 O.
4. For hire OF clerk, dispositions, &C.. 70 VI
5. For preparing three ceeds ana acknowl- =,
Judgments. ............ o. OS
g. For services of assignee. .............. SO 0l
| = Paramount retaipcd for other expenses 40 81
| s27O 6;
Besides these items there were charged by
the assignee:
8. For principal item In a total charge Of
s32.50 for printing-a bill! for All adver-s -, =,
tisement Of twenty lines. Ol
O. For arbitrating between two creditors