Page images
PDF
EPUB

tice, that the honest debtor cannot retain any of his property from a cruel creditor, but a dishonest debtor, by absconding, may prevent his creditor from collecting his debt. To retain a few articles of furniture, which the law exempts, you compel him to disgrace himself by an ignominious flight; you require him to leave his home; you make him an outcast from his friends, from his duty, and his business. Place this question in any point of view you please, and it still will be evident that it can only benefit the rogue; and all experience has shown that it affords no advantage to honest men. If a creditor were sufficiently cruel to take from a debtor the articles which the law exempts from execution, were it in his power, he would, without hesitation, order him to prison to compel him to surrender them.

It is true, the law provides, that the debtor, when taking the oath, shall not be compelled to include them in his schedule; but how often have you known a poor debtor, in possession of what the law allowed him, when the oath was administered? It would scarcely pay the fees of a lawyer to get him through the act, and if he does not employ one, he may lay in jail and rot, before your laws will reach his case. Then where is the humanity of your boasted insolvent laws, where is the equity and even-handed justice which they so freely distribute, through this happy land? Any one can easily see that these laws are only imitations of what they should be; 66 they hold the promise to the ear, but break it to the hope." They are modelled after those of the old common law, but not having principle on which to rest, they not only prove useless, but worse than none.

The common law, in holding that property was the only return which could be made for the violation of a contract, required the redress of the creditor to be confined to property. This being the only legitimate representative of itself, if no property was possessed by the party, no satisfaction could be given to the creditor; consequently where the common law authorised the exemption of certain articles, such as the books of the scholar, the axe of the carpenter, and the like, it answered the end designed and avowed, which was, that the debtor might not be prevented from supporting his family, and serving the commonwealth in his station.

Here, then, are two laws, possessing equal privileges, holding out, apparently, equal benefits; and yet in their practice are entirely at variance: one answers the purpose designed to the full

est extent, the other has no effect, and why is this so? The answer is easy; one is founded on the immutable principles of truth and justice; while the other is based upon the most flagrant violation of the priceless privileges of human rights—it is the deformed offspring of tyranny.

It would require more than ordinary labor to point out the many violations of natural rights, and the evident tendency of the insolvent laws to immorality of the worst description. All of which, we may easily see, is produced by the first step from the correct

course.

It will be said, that creditors are not disposed to be cruel, when debtors are inclined to be honest.

The presumption on which the insolvent laws are founded, as will be seen by reference to the proclamation of Elizabeth, is just the reverse. It is unfortunately true, that the most of creditors are more anxious to compromise with a dishonest, than with an honest debtor. They are well aware that if they put the dishonest one to jail, he will, as soon swear false as tell a lie, and they will get nothing; whereas, if they compromise, something may be saved. The consequence is, that an honest man has not the same advantages as the rogue; it not only gives the dishonest man this advantage, but every inducement is held out to compel him to add perjury to his other offences. It will have the same effect, in a degree, on the honest man, finding himself shut up in a jail, and feeling himself entirely free from wilfully doing wrong, his resentments naturally grow stronger against the creditor, who, to compel the performance of a contract which is beyond his power, has thus disgraced him, deprived him of the power to help himself, or to protect or support his family.

What is it natural to suppose would be his feelings? Would he not resolve to resent so gross an outrage? Would he not determine that what property he did possess, should not go to pay a man whom he must believe was his greatest enemy, but that it should be kept to support his family, and to pay his more lenient creditor. Under this state of feeling, he would reason himself into the belief that it was right to release himself froin the bars of a prison, by means of the insolvent oath. Will any person say that he is not aware of many oaths thus forced from persons thus circumstanced, which are false?

It would seem to be almost justifiable thus to visit upon an oppressive creditor the cruelty of his acts, in a way most likely to affect his feelings. Laws should be so framed as to require no test of individuals where their interests and their resentments conspire to force them to commit perjury. Surely there never was, or ever could be a system of laws so completely framed in all their parts, to produce the object which they so certainly aim at, as the whole of the laws relative to imprisonment for debt. Not one part of them but tends to debase the moral sense and degrade the habits: Not one provision but stimulates to crime and deters from virtue: Not one clause which does not tend to oppress the honest poor and accommodate the rogue. They never have answered one solitary end for which laws ought to be established, but have in every way promoted the evils which laws are intended to prevent.

The committee, therefore, being thoroughly convinced from the foregoing considerations, that the abolishment of imprisonment for debt is a measure called for not only by natural justice and humanity, but by sound policy and expediency, have considered in what manner and by what form of enactment this measure should be carried into effect. As their aim has been throughout to distinguish between mere indebtedness and fraudulent conduct on the part of debtors, and to point out the flagrant injustice of visiting both indiscriminately with a severe and vindictive punishment, so would they cautiously endeavour, while protecting the innocent from unmerited severity, not to screen the guilty from the just rigours of the law.

The effect of doing away with imprisonment for debt being to leave creditors without other resort than as against the property of their debtors, every precaution should be taken to prevent and punish, not only any fraudulent attempt on the part of a debtor to place his property beyond his creditors reach, but every act of his with respect to his property which may weaken the creditors security from that source.

Provision to a certain extent is already made on this subject by the Revised Statutes; but the committee think that any law by which imprisonment for debt shall be abolished, should not only define with reasonable certainty, what acts a debtor may not do with his property, but declare those acts, if done, to be offences punishable criminally; and they are of opinion that in all cases of conviction and consequent imprisonment for such offence, committed by a debtor,

the provisions of the Revised Statutes, authorising the appointment of trustees to take charge of his property and pay his debts with it, should apply.

The committee have therefore prepared an act, in conformity with these views, and have directed their chairman to bring in the same.

IN ASSEMBLY,

February 11, 1831.

REPORT

Of the committee on the erection and division of towns and counties, on the petition of inhabitants of the town of China, Genesee county.

Mr. Knight, from the committee on the erection and division of towns and counties, to whom was referred the petition of the inhabitants of the town of China, in the county of Genesee, for a division of said town,

REPORTED

That the territory comprehended in the town of China, is twelve miles long by eight broad; and by the late census of the United States, contains a population of about 2,400 inhabitants. That the peculiar location of the inhabitants and course of the roads, render it necessary for many of the inhabitants to travel ten miles to attend the annual town-meeting.

And it further appearing that a majority of the taxable inhabitants ask said division, the committee have therefore prepared a bill, which they ask leave to present.

[blocks in formation]
« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »