Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1820-03-25

Mr. Van Dyke observed that this
nos bill with double aspect, look
;nr both to the interest of the debtor
and the CREDITOR; and he presumed The
national legislature would never con-
sent to subject debtors to the scrutiny.
.be inouisition, the penalties, and all
.hs circumstances required by the bill,
without providing for his ultimate re-
lief by affording reasonable security
Cor his release from his creditors
There was, he believed, as little pro-
hah;l;ty of fraud with his amendment as
without it, and it was certainly equita-
HE towards the debtor. If found to be
;nexpedient in its operation, it would
he as easy to repeal it as to enact it
hereafter, if found necessary, &c.
Mr.. Dickerson was opposed to the
amendment. He would appeal as a'tle
as possible to the oath of the debtor, and
offer as few motives as possible to the
commission Of fraud. He wished the
creditors to have fair and equitable
voice in the release of the debtor, which
he believed would not be the case If the
amendment prevailed. In fact, if the
hill were relaxed. as to the debtors, he
should be obliged, he feared, to vote a
gainst its passage. He had witnessed
: fhe operation of the former law, and he
was sure, from his knowledge of that
act, that Shis amendment would pro-
duce more harm than good.
Mr.. Lanman was compelled also to
differ from the mover of this amend
ment. The insolyent acts of the east
ern states had almost always given e.
quality to tie number and the value of
debts 10 the discharge of the debtor; in
New York, the old insolyent law, which
had discharged more debtors perhaps
than any other in the Union, required
the consent of three fourths in value
and number, so that the apprehension
that this section requiring two-thirds
only, would present too many obsta-
cles to the release of debtors, vas not
well founded. Mr.. l.. said ne was in
favor of this bill, because it would have
the effect to limit the practice of credit,
and would tend to keep men within
their real means this he thought the
true reason for bankrupt law; and
the consequence would be, that there
would not be many large creditors
men would be afraid to become So
Mr.. l.. argued at some length to illus
trate these opinions-obsewing, III the
course Of his remarks, that the reason
why banks had declined TO consent to
the discharge of bankrupts. might be
attributed to the circumstance, that In
debts to banks there were other persons
1.-THE endorSers) also responsible with
the bankrupt, and release OF the bank
rupt might affect that responsibility
and other rights, &c. The useful ef-
feet Of this bill, Mr.. l.. repeated, would
be to keep men within their real means
and true capacity for business, and pre-
vent them from running into debt, by
deterring others from giving credit ex
tensi,ely or lightly. The sy stem would
become, Woyeninto the concerns OF So
ciety ;fevery person would square his
business and his policy by the frame
and policy of this great system, which
seemed to have entered 50 prominently
into the views of the Trainers of the con-
stitatioD, &c.
Mr.. Van Dyke was ayerse to press
ing his amendment in opposition to the
opinions of his friends, SO generally
expressed; and would therefore, for the
present. withdraw Eliminating that
he would, when the subject next came
up, propose an amendment of much I'M
portance i'm this system--whiCh was, to
extend its provisions to the voluntary
acceptance of other classes, not no"
cOmprehended in the bill.
The bill was then postponed until to-
morrow.