Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1849-07-20

the floor, moved The Previous Question. n's
subject had been fully discussed ID Inc cotn'n'I1
of The Whole and he did no, mink lna' VIC sn IN
vase so mach time in useless debates, oeauhSs
al The air ard rcpctiiions OF the den'ical aisu-
mems Mr D had no objection to hear me views
oil the gentleman from Logan, especially d Nc
agreed with him. or.;,s, his mode
- nreven,inu a iaif discussion OF one oil Inc most
;mno,,a n, une.lions which can come before us
| ~, z eau no right ia the member from ROCK
,rsoe 10 ACT as overseer in deciding whether OF
m, he House was sufficiently informed on The
subject. .or
Mr.. DoRMAN declined the office OF overseer'
| especially over the gentleman IRON Logan.
| Mr.. FERGU SON further opposed The pieVi'
cas- question.
Mr.. SCOTT followed on The same side-and,
in The course of his argument referred 10 lhe
golden rule of equality, which Inc provision
would introduce, aud which should be most care,
tul deliberaed by The House. Mr.. . ASKED
he ayes aud noes On The previous queslion.
Mr.. DORMAN said tha! il the golden rule OF
equality were carried oui and CERTAIN geniiemec
made The Standard, il would take exacuy hree
weeks, 10 discuss This subject.
Mr.. CLAIBORNE appealed TO the House 10
sustain The previous Gaesliep. Inc tfouse snonio
ither sustain its rules, or aboishing The ID min
utss rue. allow the widest latitude CT debate. He
was moi responsible for this extra session, and II
gentlemen were disposed 10 listen 10 useless and
Iepeated speechcs. ami leave the Code unfnished
on The ISL October, when our term constitution
aiy expires. he would leave them 10 take lhe
responsibily.' and was ready 10 submit. lie
thought il unfair that members who a0senled
Themselves during The discussion OF he subject 10
| committee oil the whole, should in The House De
entitled 10 benefit OF clergy. (evidenlly audDs TO
AZ l.aY NJ
characterized them.)
MIR. C. said many good things, which shall
n0l attempt TO reproduce.
Mr.. F. made playful rclorl 10 Mr.. Y.
Mr.. HARRISON OF L opposed the previous
question, as il would cul Of The proper amend
ment OF The section.
The House refused, 80 to So, 10 sustain The pre-.
vious question.
III is proper 10 state lha, during The greater part
OF The subsequen, discussion, the benches were
yery thiu-a great many members appearing 10
think thai they had heard enough on The subject
FERGUSON then proceeded 10 argue IN
support OF the proposition TO give priority 10 ldu-
| ciary debis-as the infant. lunstic &C., were
entitled 10 come back upon the guardian, &c !,
who was specially appointed by law 10 project
| heir rish,s-bul who might emtezze property
which does not belong 10 him, and dei;aud ndi-
yiduals, who, under the law, cannot lake care oil
| themselves. Reject this amendment, and The
| iadsmen, creditor comes in and taxes the pro-
perry OF the infant, &c, 10 pay bis own debts, and
deiraud the securities and inlanIS, &c. Is this
Injustice or eoui,y2 Is Ibis carrying out the go-
den rule Of equality which has been SO much
Iauded hera2 Mr.. F. was ia favor OF striking
out The priority OF udsmeni.creditoTs-b
| would oppose 10 The last, the iDiquilous plan 10
postpone fidnciary debts.
MIR. STOVALL followed in opposition 10 The
amendment. The Code protecis infants, luna.
TICS &c because il provides that The Commits
sioner shall report the condition OF The sareties
on The tonds, and The Court, which has The
Whole control OF The mailer, can remove Insol
vent and substitute solvent sureiies. Why them
should We give priority 10 these tlduciafy debts
and why not, by rejecting The proposition, devote
all the assets To the payment ot debs, upon the
great principle Of equalny2 The community al.
ways justified ard applauded man, who con.
veys his property Ter The equal payment OF all
his debls-bui, when he devoles bis properly TO
preferred creditors, the individual loses character
for honesty, as he shocld.
Mr.. THOMSON Of j., said that there was
reason tor law LA years old, which is design.
ed 10 protect these iduciary debts. The surelies
get nothing for their trouble and risk land should
be fairly put on The same ioolins with infants,
lunalics, &c. The fiuciary ge,s thousands on
the lailh oi the estate, makes way with the es-
tate, ana the proposition is designed TO act as
deed Of Uusl Tor The protection OF The suIelies-
The policy OF the law is TO make prompt setlle.
men S, and such would be the effect OF giving
priority 10 fduciary debts. The proposition is
sustained by wisdom aud policy, aud should be
adop ed by The House.
Mr.. SCOTT had 10 thank the gentleman from
Gfeenbrier and Jefferson Tor having boldly and
fully met The argument, While the gentleman from
r hoI t,al Is l>hi in adj
the question in issue, aud tuning his batteries
agains, another pont not in discussion, VIZ: The
priority given TO judgment creditors, Mr.. s. TO-
tally dissenled from the Law arguments Of the Two
frsl gentlemen. We now live, said Mr. s., un.
&c! two rues-lhe administration Of legal assets,
and OF equitable assets. A court OF equity dis
regards the determinations in favor OF particu-
lar debls, and places them all on The golden rule
oi equality.
Here conversation look place between Mes.
sienrs PRICE and SCOTT as to he law in re-
gard 10 the rule on which courts ci equity admin
isler assets as 10 legal priorily.l
Mr.. S. said both rules cannot be right. One
must be right and The Other wrong. We must abol-
i,h the che or The other rule, aud wipe out from
the Code the anomaly which must otherwise en-
sue. Hlr. S. resisted Tho proposition 10 give prori
" IL fiiuciary debs-it would give an niquitous
preference 10 securities who might collnde with
dishonest fducary. He would prefer 10 have
this clause stricken OUTPUT, rather than see il
adopted as il is, he would like 10 see il amended,
so as 10 confine The said priority 10 cases, "where
the surelcs 10 The official bond Of such fducariss
shall prove insufficient 10 pay such debts"
MIR 8. moved 10 amend The amendment accord.
insly.
Mr. THOMSON of ]. opposed Mr. ScoTT's
amendment. on the great principle CT protecting
surel,cs, who, in these tduciary cases, arc in
volved in large amounts, and run heavy lisk.
Mr. STROTHER thought it fair and just that
The law should throw It's protection around Ike
rights Of infants. By no terms Of Court, by no
provision OF law, do inian's' distributes BE-.
come creditors eL c0Htroctc they do MOI
stand on the .ooils Of contract. creditors. Often
surelies make themselves nsolveat 10 avoid their
liability. The sure:eS may step in 10 protect
themselves, but The infants cannot. One OF the
rules Of equity is 10 give lien on The land TO the
vender and The same principle should be carried
out in regard To infants.
TMr MONCURE OF 8. said The Code had
stricken out this role.
Mr. VERIFY for The first time saw land. The
amendment OF Mr. SCoTT had relieved him from
all tiihculy for il proposes to protect the in
tants, and provides for priority 10 cases, in which
the sIreiies OF fiduciares are insoyenl-lhe very
object which gentlemen mad avowed themselves
wiling 10 attain.
Mr. PRICE opposed Mr. Scorr's amendment,
as likely To be followed by moss mischievous and
announcement Effects. The question of insolven.
cy will come before Chancery Court, and lhr.
" years may elapse before that frs, poin, is set
| lied The amendmen, came from the deadly op-
pouent Of he original proposition, and lis object
was 10 defeat the pan-and the House should
| take care not 10 follow his lead.
MIR FERGUSON said the amendment was
radically wrons-and il adopted, lac should &c
against the whole proposition. In reply 10 Mr.
Scot, Mr. said lha', il The fduciary fails TO ad
| minister The estate properly, ard embezzles il, ii
is his fault, and not the fault Of The surely. To
state tie position is 10 answer il. The question
is no hing more or less lhan au Issue between
two classes OF preferred credcrs-viz: f luciary
creditors and judgment credoTs-and Mr. F.
continued 10 urge The equity and wisdom oil pre-