Mr. JOHNSON. I desire to call the attention of the chairman of the committee to one or 2 points; and 1st I beg leave to say that I would object very seriously to a bill extending this exemption to cases of tort. Take the case of slander or libel, which is punishable by damages; it might be argued that by compelling a man to pay damages for the injury he has done his neighbor by slander or libel you rob his family to that extent of their means of support. The same argument might be used in the case of a fine inflicted upon a man as punishment for his crime. But this is not the point to which I desired to call attention. I do not see that the bill makes any provision for a proper estimate of what is a sufficient provision for 3 months' support of a family. There is no provision for any appraisement by any marshal, constable, or other officer. Who is to make this assessment? Is the officer to exercise his own judgment? He might not know how large the family was; and if he should not set apart sufficient for the maintenance of the family is he to be held responsible to the debtor having set apart too little? It strikes me that the bill should contain some provision for the selection of suitble persons as appraisers, so that the executive officers might be relieved of that responsibility. One word as to the remarks of the Gentfrom Illinois [Mr. Ross] in regard to the exemption of the homestead to the amount of $1,000. such exemptions are common in the western States, and in those States are proper. There are reasons why the new States should extend to persons proposing to settle there advantages which they do not enjoy in the old States. But in a city like this, where the population is to a great extent transientin its character, an exemption of that sort would operate injuriously. It is not proper that a man should come here and, on the strength of a small homestead, contract debts to the amount of $1,000, then set his creditors at defiance, sell his homestead, and move away. Thereasons in favor of a large exemption in the Territories and new States do not apply to this city, where the population is of a different character. As I have already remarked, it strikes me that the bill in its present form is defective because it does not provide for suitable persons to make the assessment of the property to be set apart for the maintenance of the family.