Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1832-01-31
TUESDAY. JANUARY 81, 1882.
To the Editor of the alexandria GaaMe.

it is gratifying to find strong desire IN the pub
lie mind to abolish Imprisonment for Debt. MY
attention has been called to the subject by the
late meeting held at Faneuil Hall in Boston. 1t
is not the first time that the subject has been asl-
tated there, and trust that it will spread from
one end of the Union to the other. 1t has been
considered in various parts OF the country, ana
remember il was eloquently recommended 10 'he
Legislature of Louisiana by its late lamented Eo-
vernon Robertson. 1t is singular circumstance
that imprisonment for debt was ever allowed 10
exist after these States became free and indePen-
dent. In accounting for its existence among u.s.
we can trace it, with other things, to the Common
Law Of England; but am inclined to believe
that, strictly speaking, it forms no part Ut the
common law, but that in the latter country 1t was
an usurpation of the rights anu liberties OF Eng
lishmen. Blackstone gives US brief history OF
its rise aud progress. and shews that 1t was found
ed altogether upon legal fiction; aud think,
according to the showing Of that illustrlous law
yer, il was an infringement upon the rights OF
the people. The ablest argument that ever
saw upon this subject, is contained in speech
delivered by Mr.. Pindall. of Virginia, few years
ago. on the discussion Of the Bankrupt Bill. He
details the whule Jaw respecting the doctrine Of
imprisonment for debt, and clearly shows that
the practice was a violation of the wholesome
principles Of the common law Of England, and a
violation Of the rights and dignity Of the people.
The Bills Of Rights adopted by all the States,
clearly forbid imprisonment except in cases Of
crime, ana think, when they are rightly consi-
dered, such will be the opinion Of our legislators
and civilians.
am not aware that this subject has ever been
seriously argued before Court Of Justice, but
surely no Court could object to the entertaining
of jurisdiction, and deciding constituuonally up
on it. Ii is, indeed. somewhat matter of Won
DER that practice IF depriving persons OF their
liberty for debt should have existed so long. and
quietly allowed. 1t seems to me that the reason
OF submitting to 1t in this country is the same as
that which would apply in England; that it
springs from blind subservieucy to the wishes
OF hat class tor whose benefit and at whose in
stance this encroachnent was made on the liber.
ty of the subject. In what other way can we ac-
coun, for this blot upon the laws Of our country?
The evil, grant, existed at the period Of the
adoption of the Constitution. 1t has grown into
practice, and now requires the skful hand of the
LEGISLATOR to remove it. But it can be done as it
forms subject as well for legislative as judicial
interference 1t is time, however. for the evil
IN he removed a, once, and Courts of Justice are
the proper tribunals for considering al questions
truly constitutional. 1t is equally surprising that
the Courts in England have not before this acted
upon it, and restored the subject to his proper
rights. Many great questions OF liberty have
been settled by them. and it ought to be the boast
of Englishmen. that the Forum has always nursed
and sent forth the ables defenders of their rights
and liberties. But still they have never touched
this question; that it is not equally susceptible
like other great questions, Of fat argument and
correct decision, but 1t IS surrounded by pecu
liar influence, tina, seems almost too strong for
ua,rio,ism itself to attack. But l may be doing
injustice to the British lawyers. As body of
men, they are ent tiled to the thanks OF mankind
for the disinterested stand they have always ia
ken in the cause of liberty and every thing that
concerns their happiness They are unimpeach-
able in every public virtue, and may be termed
the restorers Of the rights Of the Britons. They
ar. the trues, friends the people of that island
have in every political crisis. But whatever diff
h,ul,y may ex,s, in England for the abolition OF /
imprisonment for debt, none ought to exist here.
The ques ion is decided already, so far as Bills
Of Rights are paramount. and have controlling
power over ordinary usages, and especially ack.
nowledged usurpations.
1t is truly nconceivable that in this country the
debtor and the criminal should be placed upon an |
equality. but distinction in their lot should in
s,an,ly take place. 1t isa matter that concerns
the great body Of the people, and l do not see
tina, the lawyers have any interest in encouraging
the practice Of sending the debtor to Jail Indeed,
80 e. as have any kuo~ieds- Of the learned
members of that nobls prsiaasiOn, am conscious |