will do, if no hope is extended to them of future enactments for their special and individual benefit, the Regents, having, as is hoped, profited by their past errors, will take care to limit their appropriations to their receipts, and thus the necessity of a sale of University lands, beyond the exigencies of ordinary increase of population in this state, and for the purpose of revenue only, be obviated. Thus, this munificent fund, while it shall furnish the means for educating the youth of our state who, at present may appreciate its benefits and desire to participate them, may be handed over unimpaired to endless generations of the sons of Michigan.

Believing that the Board of Regents, if convened, would accord in sentiment with the foregoing, howmuchsoever they might have regretted that it could not have been placed in abler hands for dijestion and arrangement; the undersigned, with those whom he has opportunity to consult, is of opinion that the reduction of the price of University lands is at this time inexpedient, and would result in the lasting diminution of the fund.

In conclusion, therefore, and having the best interests of that state in view, in which for weal or woe, he anticipates the residence of his descendants-he closes with the liberty of repeating the admonition:

1846.

No. 25.

Report of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. HOWELL, from the majority of the committee on the judiciary to whom was referred a resolution of enquiry into the expediency of exempting from sale on account of any debt or liability incurred after the first day of July 1847, real estate to the amount of five hundred dollars to actual residents, have had the same under consideration and submit the following report:

In the discussion of this subject, the committee propose to examine the present position of our government in regard to property and the rights of individuals therein; the reasons upon which that position is founded, as well as its application to our institutions and govern

ment.

Every material change in what would seem a settled policy of our government, should be proceeded in with the greatest caution, and with due regard to the rights and feelings of all concerned; and no such change should be made but for reasons clear, palpable, and conclusive in themselves.

Our opinions in regard to property and individual rights, may justly be said to be derived from our parent country, brought by our ancestors, incorporated into, and made a part of the political economy of this government. The formation of a republican government, based upon the principle that every man formed a part of that government, and that each individual opinion was a component part of that great mental fabric, which, in its progression, is calculated to renovate the world, and dissipate the preconceived opinion that man is incapable of self government, was, at the time, an experiment, without precedent to guide, or experience upon which to found conclusions. The purity of intentions, and the forecast of mind of its framers, formed the only reliable basis upon which they could proceed. The frame work of that government was, perhaps, one of the most beautiful structures ever matured by man, but its details very naturally partook much of the government under which they had been reared.

In its organic character were comprehended all the purposes for

which it was intended, while the many details were left to be perfected agreeably to the dictates of experience, with a view to strengthen and beautify the whole system.

The original provisions of our government in regard to property and individual rights, were in accordance to a wedded prejudice in favor of the English government, where distinctions in rank and property are made and sustained as a part of its political economy; and where the alienation of real estate is discouraged by the laws of entail and primogeniture; thereby establishing a system of perpetual tenantry as best calculated to define and perpetuate such distinctions by rendering the working classes subservient to, and controlable at the will of the landlord.

There is a marked difference between the English government and our own. The fabric of their government rests upon the concentration and weight of property, and the power of their military and naval establishments-ours upon the virtue and intelligence of our people. Theirs, upon physical force and exclusive privileges-ours, upon mental strength and equal rights.

The question is then very naturally presented, whether it should not be the policy of our government, so far as legislation is concerned, to make every man a freeman in deed; to enable him to discharge his duty independently towards his government, and with a firm conviction that the poor as well as the rich, the low as well as the high, receive equally its countenance, protection and encourage

ment.

This position is no less to be regarded in a moral than a political point of view, for it is undeniable that where a government pursues a parental instead of a discriminating policy, the attachment of its people is increased, and an ardent patriotism is warmed into life by its wisdom, justice and humanity-experience strengthens this position for no observer of passing events can shut his eyes to the fact that since the passage of the exemption law of 1842, the moral as well as the political condition of our people has been eminently progressive, and more of wholesome equality exists than could have been attained under any other system.

The credit system," so called, was based upon wrong principles in its very inception-principles at war with either equality or humani

ty. The creditor possessed not only the absolute power over the property but over the liberty of the debtor. If the debtor had no property, or insufficient to pay the demand, he was sold into slavery by the creditor, until his labor would discharge the obligation-and for what? Merely the inability, perhaps occasioned by the stern decree of an overruling Providenc, to discharge the obligations of a civil contract voluntarily entered into for the purpose of obtaining a subsistence on the one hand, and of accumulating wealth on the other. The one, by the same voluntary act, made a criminal, the other a prosecutor.

The next progressive step (in barbarity) was to incarcerate the debtor in prison, where he could neither render service to the creditor or any other person. The history of the relation of debtor and creditor shows conclusively the progression of the benign influences of christianity and humanity. Before the abolition of imprisonment for debt in the state of New York, an execution from a justice's court commenced with the following caption: "The People of the State of New York, by the grace of God, FREE and INDEPENDENT!". What was its command? To take all the property of the defendant, not excepting the wearing apparel of himself and family, or even the bed upon which might repose a languishing wife or a helpless child. What was excepted? His "arms and accoutrements"—that which was necessary to defend that very government that made a helpless wife and children the inmates of a poor-house, was, "by the grace of God," reserved to him, that he might do the bidding of his masters. What the conclusion if he had not sufficient property? "For the want thereof, take the body, and him deliver to the keeper of the common jail, &c."

It is not strange then, in the adoption of the amended constitution of New York, as late as 1821, extending the right of the elective franchise, to that class of citizens, who, on account of their poverty had never enjoyed it; "a right inestimable to them, and formidable to tyrants only"-it is not strange, we repeat, that objections were made to their judicious evercise of that power, from the state of vassalage and dependence, they had been doomed to occupy. Humanity blushes to record the incidents of the present century. The tendency of legislation has been to make labor subservient to capital, and this ten

dency has been facilitated by the time and attention capitalists are able to bestow upon public affairs, over and above those who gain their bread "by the sweat of their brow."

In the public press, in the balls of legislation, the principles of credit, the maintenance of the public faith, the rates of exchange, the money market, the exports and imports of the country are all discussed with zeal and ability-but where is the press that advocates, where is the voice that is raised in behalf of that class upon whose labor depend all these operations-whose industry pays the debts-regulates the money market—gives to commerce its impetus, and who are the right arm of the defence of the government in the hour of its peril and its danger?

For more than half a century, has this inequality existed in our government-deeply imbued with the principles of freedom-patiently awaiting the time when an enlightened public opinion, and a generous philanthropy would ameliorate their condition-they have toiled on, without repining, without murmuring, and they now ask us as guardians of the public weal, as brethren of the same family, to extend to them the protecting and parental care of that government, which, it has ever been their pride and their pleasure to sustain,

Not only is it demanded in a political point of view, to enable every man to maintain his just position in society, but every impulse of humanity prompts us to provide for the maintenance and education of all the helpless and indigent families of our own fellow citizens. To place it in the power of every citizen to provide and retain a comfortable and respectable home for his family, and secure the education of his children, would be the surest way to dissipate those false notions of rank and aristocracy which are daily advancing in this country, and establish the only true lines of distinction which should exist under our institutions—a rank of merit, and an aristocracy of intellect.

Upon this subject public opinion has been progressive for the last few years—the cloud of prejudice yields before the sunshine of reason. To the philanthropists such a state of public feeling contrasts beautifully with that cold and marble selfishness which dooms man a menial for his fellow man. Let man be opressed, make his poverty an obstacle to the developement of his intellect and his energies, and