Askov American. [volume] (Askov, Pine County, Minn.) 1914-current, 1940-04-11
Not Credit, But
Blame
BY Hjalmar Petersen.

Defenders of the Minnesota home
stead lien law use the argument that
the law was enacted in the 1889 seS-
sion because it would tend toward
cutting down the amount of money
to be paid for old age assistance in
the state At the time the law went
into effect, January l, 1910, figures
showed that about three per cent of
those receiving old age assistance
refused to permit liens on their
homesteads.
Many of the three per cent were
recipients of less than the average
and likely could exist without the
old age assistance, or they were peo-
pie whose pride was injured by this
affront of the state. But in time,
forced by grim necessity, even some
of that small group will accept the
terms of the state, if in the interim
they have not sold their meager hold
ings and exhausted the proceeds
therefrom. When 81 per cent of the
old age recipients consented to the lien
on their homesteads, if they owned
property, it showed that they were in
need of the assistance.
1t would seem that as time goes on
the homestead lien law will have
little if any bearing on lessening old
age assistance, for persons anticipat-
ing the time they will need assistance
will in years prior thereto deed pro-
perty to their children or others.
In defense of the law, advocates
have argued that it was enacted to
force children into line to care for
their parents. Rare examples of chill
dren earning $4,000, 81 900 and $4,000
annually have been cited, and the
argument has been advanced that
such children who neglect parents
should not be entitled to inherit pro-
perty left by their parents.
The fact remains that we have had
law on the statute books of Mime
sofa for more than so years which
covers such cases. If children can
afford to take care of their parents,
that statute has not been generally
enforced is question that might be
asked of county commissioners, coun-
ty welfare boards and county attor-
neys. Certainly, the lien law will not
rectify the situation, and if it does
help now, in rare cases, it will lose its
effect over the years, as pointed out
above.
Take for instance the case of son
who has an income of $4,000 a year
and who neglects his aged parents
who reared and educated him. That,
of course, is terrible discredit to the
son. Assuming the parents are prac-
tically destitute and have no property,
what purpose will a lien law serve
in such case? If the parents have
no property, there is nothing for the
son to inherit and there is no property
for the state to place lien upon.
The old law, compelling children able
to do so, to take care of the parents,
is the only law that can be invoked
in such cases. The lien law means
nothing there.
Recent press dispatches bring out
that welfare boards in Goodhue
county and st. Louis county are
looking into this matter. The well
fare board in Goodhue county is
about to make thorough check of
the 608 old age pensioner cases and
to ascertain if the children of those
recipients are able to support or
contribute to the support of their
parents. If able to do so, they will
face court action if they ignore orders
to be issued by the welfare board.
Conservative friends of Governor
Stassen say that the people should
not "blame" the governor for the
homestead lien law, that it was an act
of the Legislature and that the Legis-
lature will accept the blame" This
alibi and lodging of responsibility
is good sign that they realize it is
not good law, and is one to which
there is decided objection. If it were
a good law, they would not use the
word "blame" but would talk about
taking "credit" for it.
It is true that the bill was passed
in both houses of the Legislature,
but certainly when the governor
signed the bill and it became law, it
cannot truthfully be said that the
governor was not in on it. Had he
been opposed to the law, he could
have vetoed the bill, but that he did
not do. He advocated it, signed it,
and it became law, and so therefore
in the words of his friends and de-