Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1879-11-20


rendered. If we remember rightly the
decision in Duncan vs.. Barrett held that
tho Language of the Constitution was restrics
tive and that no legislaton could add to or
subtract from the list Of articles enumerated
rs exempt, and corn, bacon, &c., not being in
the list, were not exempt. BY parity of rea-
soning it would be held that the personally of
ono not owning land was not exempt, for the
language Of the Constitution is, "to secure
the full enjoy mont of such homestead exemp.
ton to tho person entitled thereto, or to the
head of any family, the personal property of
such person of the following character, to
wiz; and thon follows tho enumeration of
articles exempted. Now, how can ono owning
no homestead fall under this clause, and how
can such. under the reasoning, be entitled to
any exemption of personality The Court
may hold tho right of persons owning no
homestead, to bo, under tho Constitution,
res tntegra. and that any statute granting OK
omption to such would DO constitutional. If
this woro true. then this class might have, by
statute, IN exemption of personally to any
extent.
The homestead. undor the Constitution and
various statutes, is in tho clouds to lawyers
and public officers in many respects still,
though dozen Of cases have perhaps been
carried up. The construction thus Far has
been in accordance with tho prevailing opin-
ion among lawyers, and we hopo to SEQ tho
subject fully ventilated in further decisions,
cut whore it will. Truth is great and will
prevail is an old maxim, and if fair con-
strncton of the Constitution warrants or calls
for such decision, rs the one referred to,
let it como. Tho Democrats arc not respono
siblo for it, but it is the result of Radical
Ignorance in tho draft Of tho Constitution.
We are sorry tho result would be oppressive
to tho poor, but law is law, and its proper
construction and enforcement should DO ex-
acted though tho heavens TALL.
One other word on this subject. Wo be-
lievo in matters which so nearly concern the
public Interest,", q law should be passed re-
quirng tho Supreme Court, on q case mule,
to construo in full the section of the Constitu.
ton granting homestead. When small
amounts aro involved, citizens cannot afford
to carry up cases and often suffer wrong as
the less Of two evils. If tho homestead cx-
cmption, in all it's aspects, had been cons
strncd years ngo, much expense and trouble
would havo been saved tho people, and if
deemed proper it could havo been amended.
Would this bc taking away Othello's occupa~
ton? Wo think not, for while it might have
lesscned litigation on that point, this would
not only have boon n matter of right to the
people, but tho lawyers would still have
found enough of legitimate litigation for their
employment. In fact, that is tho best gov.
crnment whose laws are clcurest and most in
tclligblo and where thero is Ms little litiga
ton rs possible and ut the least expense. In
our State it seems to be the disposition of the
Courts to shirk every possible point, unless
It's decision be essential to the point in issue.
Take tho effect of final discharge, or tho
right of q ward SUI juris to call his guardian
to account in the Probate Court, and both
these important questions have been shirkcd.
tho first several times. Again, suppose in
McNameo vs. Waterbury, where tho right Of
tho Probate Court to sell land for payment of
debts come in question, and on which the
Court was divided, it had been specially de-
clared that such Court hnd no right to parti.
ton lands, how much trouble aud litigation
would have been saved to the people. In the
late decision, declaring this point, doubt is
left as to whether McNnmec vs.. Waterbury
has been ovcrruled. Some Judges hold ono
way and other Judges tho other way Who
now can pretend to understand the home.
stead in the light of all tho decisions rem
dered2 The best founded opinion is nero
conjecture. for it is cnpaS!o of many construc.
cidcd it becomes the law. Let us havo n law
by yn,ch provisions Of such unusual impor-
tanco may bc construed in full on q mado up
case.
Tl,o C%oko H.lell.