The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1881-08-18


the general impression is that the Presi-
dent canno, recover. His death will be
a serious loss to his country, anu will be
greatly regretted by all classes and all
parties throughout the Union.
TIE LIEN i.AW-SHOyID II BE RE
PEALED.
The action OF the Summer meeting OF
the State Grange and State Agricultural
Society in Grccnvillc a few weeks ago,
resolving to petition the Legislature this
Fall for The repeal Of the lien law, will
bring this law, in All Of its bearings, up
for discussion AT the coming session of
the General Assembly, and in order that
il, full importance, as affecting every
part Of the State, may be fully developed,
il is very desirable that the reasons for
and against the repeal Of the law shall
ne presented from time 10 time during
the short interval until the meeting Of
the General Assembly that public opin-
;on may not camor for action which may
afterwards be the source Of mischief and
regret. As 4 member Of the General
Assembly we have on several occasions
voted agains, The repeal Of tn" lien law,
and Iow see no reason why the system
should be changed. 1t is certainly y
misfortune, in Il material point Of view,
for nan to give lien, but it is no
greater misfortune than to buy on credit
The lien law is nothing more nor less
than II short and cheap method Of giving
credit to the man of small means If it
should he repealed, the system Of mort
cages upon the crops would be substitu-
ted, and instead Of costing fifteen cents,
would cost several dollars, to be paid by
the man obtaining the credit. and then,
fit should become necessary to enforce
the mortgage, the costs of foreclosure
would be very much greater than the
costs for enforcing the lien, as at present
provided. The Supreme Court Of this
Stale has decided in the case Of Moore
VS.. Byrum, that nj Common Law man
has the right TO mortgage n crop, even
before it is planted, and where it is to be
grown upon the lands Of another 40 that
by abolehing the lien law this course
could be resorted to, which, from ncces-
sity, would be more expensive and more
injurious rs system. The lien Inv mas
grown up since the war, but so has the
homestead, and the one il the almos!
0ccessary accompaniment Of the other
Ii it were not for the homestead law
there would no, be so much necessity
for the lien law, for all that n man has
would be liable for his debts, and would
give him basis Of credit. As it is now
no man has any credit upon his property
unless he OWLS more than one trousand
dollars worth Of real estate, and five hun
a-ed dollars WORTH Of personal property
so that to these who own less than this
amcunt o. property, the lien is n con.
venient and cheap mode Of rendering
whatever capital one has, whether it is q
small amount of land or n little personal
property cr only his labor, available rs
basis of temporary credit to enable hin,
to support himself and family more in
accordance with his tnstes and wishe:
than he could otherwise do. To take the
lien law away is to q considerable extent
10 deprive the poorer class of our country
Of credit, nrd render them more depen
dant 1t is, however, argued that credit
is 4 bad thing, and is abused by the per.
sons who give liens-that they buy toe
much and are not sufficiently cautious
hence the means of injuring themselve.
should be taken away from them by
Withdrawing credit. This argument pro
cceds on the assumption that the mer
who give liens are incapable Of attending
to their business, and that the State
should act as guardian for them We
do not think so. The State should give
its citizens the most ample protection and
the greatest possible amount of liberty
consistent with the safety Of society.
The lieu law does not interfere with soci-
ETY. Mt all. 1t does not endanger the lib
erty or the property of any citizen. 1t
imposes no obligation upon any man. 1t
merely confers a privilege which enc
may or may not use as ho sees proper.
If, therefore, it is cheaper and better TO
borrow money and buy for cash he can
do SO. or he can make any other more
satisfactory arrangement for supplying
the wants of his family he has the right
to do SO without the least interference !;
but if these means of supplying his wants
are not available, then The law give. him
the privilege of giving lien upon his
crops to secure the necessaries for his
own and HIS famiy's comfort.
Nor does the law restrict one as to
whom the lien may be given. If the
an'oWner viii supply the tenant on
tenis more satisfactory than any other
person, he can take the lien, or it may be
given to the merchant, or to some neigh.
Dor, or even to money lender, as Sc
curity for the necessary credit. When
once given, if supplies are not furnished
upon satisfactory terms, the party can
give new lien to some one else, Or take
up the one already given by giving lien
to another for this purpose. The use of
the lien law, therefore, is entirely op-