Shenandoah herald. [volume] (Woodstock, Va.) 1865-1974, 1874-06-11
ANDoAlI HERALD AND VALLEY AI1vI1I27Is1zI2

Ahl AQN IL v ~
Tins ease was argued tor the banks
rupt by Major A. K. Courtney, and
for the creditors by Mr.. John Dunlop.
The power to except from the opera
ton of The law property liable'to execu-
ton under the exemption laws OF the
several States, as they were actually
enforced, was at one--tIrnv- questioned
upon the ground that it was violation
OF the constitutional requirement OF un
lformity, but it has thus far been sus-
tanned, for the reason that it is made a
rule OF the law, to subject to the pay,
ment Of debts under its operation only
such property as could by judicial pro
cess be made available for the same
purpose. This is not unjust, as every
debt Is contracted with reference to the
rights ct the parties thereto under ex-
listing exemption laws, and no creditor
can reasonably complain if he gets his
full share Of all that the law, for the
time being, places at the disposal OF
creditors. One OF the effects ola bank
rupt law is that Of q general execution
issued in favor of all the creditors OF
the bankrupt, reaching all his property,
! subject to levy, and applying it to the
payment OF all his debts according to
their respective priorities 1t is quite
proper, ther efore, to contine its opera
ton to such property as other legal pro
cess could reach. x. rule which opera
ties to this effect throughout the United
States is uniform within the meaning
OF that term, as used III the Constitu-
ton.
The act of 1873 goes further, and ex-
cepts from the operation Of the assign
ment not only such PROPERTY as was ac-
tuall1- exempted by virtue OF the exemp
ton laws, but more. 1t does not pro
vide that the exemption laws as 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 ex
cepted. 1t in effect declares by its own
enactment, without regard to the laws
OF the States, that there shall be one
amount or description OF exemption in
Virginia another in PENNSYLVANIA, In
this we think it is unconstitutional,
and therefore void. 1t changes exist
ing rights between the debtor AMI the
creditor. Such changes to be warrant.
ed by the Constitution, must be uni.
form 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
exemption laws Of Virginia as they
existed in 1871. The particular law
under which the bankrupt 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 That certainly was not before
July 6, 1869, and the debts due t.
smith, \Vanderiink, and Schindel wtr-
all incurred previous to Chat date
That OF Smith dates from the time the
note was given upon which his Judge
ment 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 ex
ecution Of the note which he holds. As
@ salnst these creditors the bankrupt is
not entitled to the benefit of the exemp-
ton. 49,.
s.. The claim Of Roberts & Co. requires
Us to determ he st VIII 1t time the Con
sltution, as tar as it relates to the pro
vision in question, look effect. It is
claimed by the bankrupt that this was
on the 9th July, 1869, when the Con
stltution was ratified by the people. ant
by the creditors that 1t was POSTPONED
until the 26th of Janna"yj, 1870, whel
the act was approved admitting the
State to representation. in Congress
The cont ct upon which Robe & Co
base their claim was made, as has been
seen, on the 18th of November, 1869.
The Constitution was adopted in &C
cordance with the provisions of the
reconstruction acts Of Cons ress. These
acts provided in substance that when
the Peep e Of the rebel States should
have formed a constitution in contormi
ty with the Constitution of the United
Safes, and should have done certain
other things named, such State should
| be entitled to representation in Con
gress. 1t was also further provided
that until the people of any of such
States should be by law admitted to
representation in Congress, any civil
government which might exist therein
should be deemed provisional only, and
in all respects subject to the paramount,
authority Of the United States, at any
time to abolish, modify, control, or sup.
ersede the same. in pursuance of these
acts, a convention duly elected ASSEMBLE
ed in Richmond on the Sd of Decem
Der, 1867, and proceeded forthwith to
frame constitution, which was oerti-
fed to Congress as required by law,
and thereupon an act was passed by
Congress and approved on the 10th Of
April, 1859, authorizing its submission
to vote of the people, and an election
OF the State officers provided for and OF
members Of Congress- The same act
provided that if the Constitution should
be ratitied at such election, the Legisla
ture Of the State then elected should
assemble at the capitol Of the State
on the fourth Tuesday after the pro
mitigation of the ratification, and that
before the State should be admitted to
representation in Congress the Lecisla>
ture, that might thereafter be lawfully
organized, should ratify tie fifteenth
amendment proposed by Congress to
the Constitution of the United States,