The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-08-14

a sound opinion for experience showed with regard
TO the scraps and crumbs of merchant who had made
bad failure that the contingent reminders of these
lost estates 10 the long run swallowed up mot
improperly but from unavoidable expenses ny the le
gal profession.
There was another view of the subject. What
was the result least the frequent effect, Of keep
ing the rod of the law suspended over the heads OF
men who had failed in business What did we see as
we walked the sreets2 Men of ardoT, and industry,
and enterprise who were willing TO work, but whose
labor was liable be swallowed up by their previous
liabilities could not consent to remain idle and hence
we saw in large letters on signs the names John Doe
and Richard Roe and after them the word "a gents In
very small letters, scarcely legble the street.
What did this mean2 1t was evidence to show the
general fact that all sorts of subterfuges and conri-
would be Iesorted to by who were DESTROYS
of gaining the profits of future labor without the
payment of past debts. This payment they had
given up as hopeless; but they must live, and they
thus covered themselves from the reach OF law
What was the moral influence of such state OF
thingsl spread through the community body OF
fraudulent men, whose example set fraud before the
eyes of their children. Was not this great public
eVil was it not a moral calamity which called for the
remedial interposition Of Congressl Mr.. r. wished
this Of things obiteraed from the land
Talk of slavery and abolition! What slavery was to
compare with the bondage Of the mind and the hearth
Men talked of chains and shackes, but these
were nothing to the chains of the soul. man might
be in all the gloom of dungeon and yet have all the
joy of freedom if his spirit but free and he might
be very slave in the open field il his mind was slave
to passion to debt 1t might be asked, in reply,
whether this House had any power TO regulate the
morals of the community2 To this he would answer
"Yes, it has" The founders Of our admirable form
of government were far-seeing and wise men; and
understanding well the character Of their country
men, and anticipating the commercial and trading
propensity which belonged to them, calculated, as
matter OF course that mutiudes Of them would be-
come involved in pecuniary difficulties, which must be
inevitable in the ordinary course OF events This liza
go 1ei The result ct any PesulArty IN our cha
sition. They looked at the shades well the lights
which marked the landscape presented in anticipation
before Them and seeing impossible for the States to
grant eiectual relief they vested in Congress the pow
er TO pass uniform bankrupt law. The privilege
was granted in the broadcast and NEST unqualified lam
guage the single limitation was that the law should be
uniform in its operation. Could il be said that power
like this was TO be suffered TO lie dormant and never
be exercised Some gentlemen held that it ought
never to be used unless there the most urgent and
pressing necessity, but Mr. R. could not agree in this
opinion. The power was not SO much granted as
privilege, as it was confded to Congress trust it
was trust which Government was bound to fulfil.
Had not their predecessors viewed in this lght2 and
had they not in the close of the Administration of
the elder Adams fulfilled the trust by passing such
law in 1902 True it was at the following session
repealed: but Mr.. r. understood that party politics
had had something to do with the repeal. The law
had been passed under John Adams il repealed
under Thomas jefferson. Tat
MIR. r. admitted that there were inherent difficulties
in the case. While every man of humanity must feel
anxious that the honest but unfortunate debtor should
be released from liabilities he never could discharge
every just mans mind strongly repels the idea Of
releasing the debtor who dishonest and fraudu-
lent Mr. r. here put the case of man who had pur-
chased real estate, paid part and given mortgage for
the remainder but who being unable to pay had suf
.raI 49, AoI ho
original owner, and So and in cases, Is per cent
of The whole purchase money still hanging over
his head, at the mercy Of the creditor; it liqu
dated debt, which execution could issue at any
time What debtor would be content to toll for years.
ay, FOR lifetime, to discharge such debt? Mr.. R.
wanted to see this class of debtors emancipated and
he believed the country could prosper till il
effected. On the other hand it was hard where
man holding lucrative office had borrowed money
and spent it, and took the benefit the act retaining
the Office and its emouments to which, in reality his
creditor had looked for repayment Such cases (and
he mentioned severa ought, if practicable to be ex-
cepted from the relief. a"
Mr. R. next went into the question Of the constitu-
tionaty of the BILL 1t related to two classes of
voluntary bankrupts, who applied for the benefit Of
the law on their own account, and involuntary, in
lation to whom application was made by their credi
tors and it referred to contracts not future but alrea
dy existing. To the objection that in this respect it
violated the provision Of the Constitution which
badc the States to pass any law mpairng the obiga-
ton of contracts Mr. r. replied that the words Of the
Constitution made marked difference in the prohibi-
onimposed upon States and that imposed upon the Ge-
neral Government. The latter was prohibited from
passing any bill of attainder post facto law y
There itstopped Now, an post facto law had been
decided TO mean only criminal statute and not law
of civil nature and therefore the restriction did not
prohibit Congress from passing civil law of retro
spectiye character But when the Constitution spoke
of States it added to the foregoing words the follow
ing nor any law impairing the validity of con-
tracts The introduction of this clause in the latter
place proved, by weknown principle of interpreta-
ton, that its omission in the other intention
al and significant; and Mr.. R. contended it was not
less wise and evincve of foresight in the trainers 1t
was conceded that States might pass bankrupt laws OF
prospective kind, until Congress should interfere by
ageneral law such law existed in the State Of New
York but if State made the law retrospective it
unconstitutional But Congress could pass general
law which should be retrospective well pTospec-
tive giving full discharge from existing obligations
as well looking to future liabilities In confrma-
ton of this view Mr. r. insisted on the fact Of the
passage of the law of $780, which time it gene
rally conceded that the law might be retrospective.
That law had been signed by the father Of the veneer
able gentleman from Massachusetts,, who would have
been the last voluntarily to have nterered with the
obligation of contracts. 1t was said indeed that q
man lending money under the Constitution was pre-
sumed to know It's PROVISIONS and made bis contract
subject TO that risk but it pushing things rather
far to make him, by ntendment of law, cognzant Of
the possibility Of statute not yet in being Mr. R.
placed little reliance on this argument. He put the
question on the broad ground that the Constitution
did empower Congress to pass retrospective law,
though not in criminal cases.
At this time the whole country was covered with
debt-with debt contracted under a totally different
state of things when currency was worth not more
than half its value; when bank notes were as plenty
as the leaves in autumn; when man had nothing TO
do but put an apron on and he could catch his lap full
at any time. True the contracts then made If strict
ly construed bound the to pay for every dollar in
his bond constitutional dollar but TO exact this
was in truth and in reality to exact two dollars for
one. Was not this demanding the interpos
ton Of Congress. if it had the power to grant relief
Surely the case had arisen which the Constitution
contemplated when the power was given. Let bill
this subject pass, and there fears to its
fate at the other end Of the Avenues for the message
at the opening of the session forbade that idea.
Mr. r here addressed the House in a persuasive