Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1832-01-27
rbouvb the re6nements of modern criticisms

m.,kable for his partially to the poorer class,
nrrferring the liberal sense Of antiquity, draws
,hs dark picture Of the effect Of giving the Gre
'T,or mower over the person Of the debtor. No
so,ner was the Roman Empire subyerted, than
,Ss delusion of Roman perfection began 10 van
~ and then the absurdity and cruelty OF
~, sy,tem began to be exploded. system which
,nr,.lsed Greece and Rome, aud filled the
'rorId with misery, and. without one redeemiug
nsne6t. could no longer be endured; and, to the
Sonor of humanity. for about one thousand years
hiring the middle ages, imprisonment tor debt
w,, generally abolished. They seemed to have
"rde1stood what, in more modern times, We are
Ie.s redy to comprehend ;that power. In any de-
,rss. over the person of the debtor, is the same
. pr,nciple. varying only in degree, whether 1t
no +. impr isOn, to ensla,e, to brand, to dismem-
bsr or TO divide his body. But as the lapse Of
time removed to a greater distance the cruelties
,,hich had been suffered, the cupidIty OF the at
suen, found means again to introduce the system,
hat. b, such slow gradations. that the unsuspect
mo moor were scarcely conscious of the change.
The history Of English Jurisprudence furnishes
IN. remarkable fact, that. for many centuries,
ner,onal liberty could not be violated for debt -
property alone could be taken to satisfy Pc
cuu'ary demand IL was not until the reign Of
Henry ILL.,, in the thirteenth century, that the
or;neipe Of Imprisonment foe debt was re, ogniz-
/ al in the land Of our ancestors, and that was in
favor of the barons alone; the nobility against
their bailiffs. who had received their rents, and
had approprlated them to tLeir own use. Here was
the shadow Of pretext. The great Objec
ton to the punishment was, that it was inflict
ed at the pleasure Of the baron Withom a tri-
al-an evil incident to aristocracies, but OBJ
noxlous to republics. The court, under the pre-
text Of imputed crime, Or constructive violence
on the part Of the debtor, soon began to extend
the principle, but without the Legislative sane
ton. In the eleventh year of the reign OF Ed
ward l., the immediate successor Of Henry, the
right of imprisoning debtors was extended to mer-
chants-Jewish merchants excepted, on account
Of their heterodoxy in religion, and was exerris-
ed with great severity. Tins extension sga> an
act of policy on the part Of the monarch. The
ascendancy obtained by the baIons. menaceti the
power Of the throne, and to countsract their in
furnce, the merchants, numerous aud wealthy
class, we're selected by the monarch and invested
with the same authority over their debtors. But
England was not yet p,epared tor the yoke. She
could endure hereditary nobility; she could to-
lerate monarchy; but she could not yet resign
her unfortunate sons, indiscrimlnately, TO the
prison. The barons and the merchants had
gained the power over their victims; vet more
than 60 years had elapsed, before Parliament
dared to venture another act, recognizing the
principle. Daring this period, Imprisonment Tor
debt had. in sumo degree, lost its novelty. fne
incarceration Ut the debtor began 10 make the
impression, that fraud. and not misfortune, had
brodyht on the catastrophe, and that he was,
therefore, unworthy ut the protection ot the
law. and too degraded tor the society OF the world.
Parliament then ventured. in the reign OF Ed
ward ILL.,, in the 1ltn century. TO extend the
principle to two other cases-debt and detlnue.
This measure opened the door Tor the impo>ltons
which were gradually introduced w judicial usur-
pa ION, aud have resulted IN the most cruel op-
pr,ssivn. Parliament, for one hundred and fifty
yrlrs afterwards, did not venture TO outrage the
sentiments { an injured aud indignant people,
by extending the power To ordinary creditors. -
b II they had land the foundation, and an irres-
ponslbe Judiciary reared the superstructure.-
From the oath year OF the reign Of Edward I'LL.
to the 10th Of Henry VIII the subject slumbered
IN Parliament. In the mean time, all the inge-
nuIty of the courts were employed, by the intro
duction Of artificial forms and legal 6ctinns, to
extend the power Of imprisonment in cases not
provided for b. statute. The jurisdiction of the
court called the Kings Bench extended to all
crimes or disturbances against the peace. Un-
der this court Of criminal jurisdiction, the debtor
was arrested by what was called The writ of Mid
dlesex, upon supposed trespass or outrage a
saIn,t the peace and dignity Of tie crown. Thus,
b. hc'itious construction, the person who owed
his ne'shbor was supposed to b., what every per-
son knew him not to be, ,iolator of the peace.
and an offender against the dignity of the crown;
AMI while his bod was held in custody for this
crime. he was proceeded against in civil action
Tor which he was not liable 20 arrest under sta
tute. Tine jurisdiction of the court Ut Common
Pleas. extending TO civil actions arising between
individuals upon private transact ons-to sustain
us Importance upon scale equal with that Of its
t'al' this coCr a9o adopted its tictions, and ex-
tended ITS g.0rr upon artificial construc ION,
quite as lar b ond ,ts statutory perusatlve; and
uP"n the fcuuous pea OF trespass, constituting
aiesd superstition OF outrage against the peace
OF the Kingdom. authorized the writ of capias,
ana suhsequeo, imprisonment. in cases where
summons only was warranted bv law. The court
exchequer was designed To protect the kings
revenue, and had no legal jurisdiction. except in
Gases OF debtors to The public. The ingenuity Of