The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1875-09-23
wonEN,s RIGHTS AND WRONGS.

1t is very natural that each Northern
newspaper writer should favor the repeal
of Southern Homestead Exemption laws.
Yet, while the North represents the cred
itor and the South the debtor class of soci
ETY., naturally, the creditor must own
everything visible and accessible. lie lent
money knowing the homestead to be aex-
empt, he then compels violent contraction
and demands his dues when few can pay
property shrinks in value, and the great
loss to the whole country must fall on the
debtor class whilelthe creditor seizes upon.
the whole PROPERTY of thecountry.. 1t must
yex the Shylocks not little that Texas and
Georgia alike make most liberal provisions
for the security of women and children
against beggary. But now the rascals are
sorely distressed because, in some cases, the
property of wives and children of Texas
and Georgia have grown greatly in value,
and especially is one newspaper angry be-
cause a woman's property that was worth
only $4,000 when conveyed to her is worth
$50, 900 and the husband bankrupt. Has
the woman no right to good luck The
husband was not credited because the wife
had home of her own, and it would be
quite as Just to setlthe next door ne'ghbor's
house and home as to deprive the wife of her
separate estate ,beeausa it has grown, ehor-
mously in valueI inFfyshe become a partici-
pant in fraudulent 'conveyanees Of property
and hold that to which she is not entitled
bill in chancery will furnish remedy,
compel discovery and restitution; hut a
woman's property, once fairly her own, in
| accordance with benefcent and just exemp-
ton acts, however. .valuablerit may become,
is none the less justly her own, and if she
choose to support a bankrupt husband and
his children it should not be forgotten that
she is free woman and can and should do
as she pleases with her own. If her father
gave her $50, 900 to invest on her own farm
or city lot, the husbands creditors would
have no moral or legal right to seize upon
the excess over ahd9sbove the sum origin
ally exempt from sale for the husbands
debts, and if the husband or any
stranger serve her honestly and generously
with no purpose at the time, real or implied,
| to defraud creditors, the woman's rights
should be held sacred She and the hus-
band, pro hdc 0ice, are two distinct persons
in fact and law. The husband isnot cred
tied for what she has, though she pays his
debts much oftener than she retains money
for her own use, which should go to the
mans creditors. When the woman's prop
erty and its products thus extinguish the
husbands liabilities nothing is said of 1t.
1t is only natural for woman to be gener
Gus; but when the, woman. as the husband
would always do, holds her own and the
| husband becomes pensioner upon. her
| bounty or starves, and She remains com-
Portable with q homestead worth five or
ten thousand, then the sharks gnash
their teeth and money-lenders and specu-
lators howl. ID Why SHOULD the wife
care9 The husband wasn't credited on &C.
count of property, much or little; and yet
she does care, and in nine eases out of ten
the woman's home and pride become the
basis of the husbands reproduced fortunes,
and his liabilities at last are ,extinguished
because wise exemption laws do not suffer
wives and children to be driven out shelter
less, exposed to the curses and contumely OF
creditors more terrible and ruinous than
lightning shafts of heaven, destructive to
life alone. while creditors destroy the char
acters and souls of their victims