Mr. STEWART. We had territorial exemption laws, and we were admitted as a State in the fall of 1864, with a constitution that to: and continued in force the laws passed y continuing in force the territorial exemption laws, so a the State of Nevada comes under this provision. Now, sir, what is the uniformity which the Constitution requires on this subject? If it means that the bankrupt law passed by Congress shall be uniform in its practical operation; if it means that it shall have, the same practical effect in one State as another, I think this bill is probably as near a uniform system as would be the adoption of an arbitrary amount of exemption applied all over the U.S. Indeed this bill comes nearer to practical uniformity in the operation of the law than would such a provision, because it is to be taken for grantedthat the States have regulated their exemptions so that they shall reserve to the debtor out the same amount of the comforts and e territorial Legislature, thus, of course, conveniences of life and afford about the same facility everywhere for reserving a provision for the family. Each State has, it must be presumed, made provision on this subject according to its own peculiar circumstances. For example, in some of the new and distant States and Territories an exemption to the amount of $500 or $1,000 would be of very little use. Where flour is worth a dollar a pound, and other things are in proportion, an exemption of $500 to the head of a family would do very little good; but that exemption in Vermont, where, everything is cheap, would in its practical operation be a very large exemption. I admit that this question is not entirely free from doubt; but inasmuch as it is impossible ever to get a bankrupt law, if it is to disturb all these rights that have grown up in the various States under what may be called their police regulations, I propose to vote for the bill with this provision in it. In order to keep their poor from being a public charge, the States have said that the law should not take from their families a certain amount which should be reserved for the support of those families. The States, in the exercise of that very wholesome power, have passed exemption laws which have been very useful and beneficial and have been popular everywhere. I say that if we under take to interfere with this entire system, which is ingrafted on the laws of almost every State of the Union, we shall never be able to have any bankrupt law. The question being one of some doubt, as I said in the outset, it is proper that we should pass the bill as it is, and then the courts will decide what is meant by “uni form laws on the subject of bankruptcy.” I believe they will hold this bill to be constitutional; and if so we can have a bankrupt law; if not we can have none. It seems to me that in this age every civilized commercial country should have a bankrupt system. It is a disgrace to us that we have no means of liberating men of enterprise who happen to have been unfortunate. Especially is such a law necessary after periods of If revolution and civilWar. we can liberate such men from the burden of debts heretofore contracted we "add to the prosperity of the community. It is highly important, as I believe, to have a bankrupt law, and inasmuch as we cannot get one without adhering to this clause in the House bill I am in favor of it and hope it will remain. I see no such cogent reasons of constitutional law as deter me from trying the experiment and seeing if we can adopt this wholesome legislation.