Mr. STEWART. We are discussing now the power of a State to interfere to enable a party to get those assets. If the State has power to interfere and let a creditor in Vermont take the entire assets by preferring a prior lien, that State has the same power to protect the family in the homestead. It is as high, but no higher exercise of constitutional power. I say it is begging the question to say that any of these laws exempt. the property of the debtor. There has been no law cited that is to that effect. The laws on this subject are entirely similar. It is true, owing to the particular situation of the country, it costing more to live and property being higher in one State than another, one State may exempt a little more than an other; but there is no great hardship in it, no practical difficulty; and there is not 1/2 the inequality that there was under the old law, that allowed one creditor to come in and take the whole under a prior attachment; but the Supreme Court and Congress in 1841 recognized that power in the State. Now, I submit if a State can prefer creditors in this form by allowing them to acquire prior liens and thus prevent an equal distribution of the property, can they not, to a limited extent, as they have already done in some of the States, protect the family from starvation? To so that there are unlimited reservations in any ote is .soying whatthe record will not warraní. of no, such law; none has been produced. we are adopting in this bill the State ex. olows of 1864, and it is to be Presumed lo been examined, and it has been or unfairn that there is no great inequality shown. SSS in those laws.. It has not been ws is so Presumption is that each of those too. othe particular condition of the practico o, it was enacted, and that the a8 n orking of this bill will be uniform, laws. ony be, by recognizing the State by the ai "ill be more uniform in its operation by mak. Plion of those laws than it would be overthe h arbitrary amount to operate all the U.S. But I do object to the "of the right, under this power, to distribute the assets of the debtor, to legislate with regard to the collection of debts in all the States, and to abrogate their laws.