Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1849-1856, 1851-02-13
!" the Judiciary Committee.

meetings IN February. and for leave 10
locate portion of their road in Proyi-
dence, was granted.
H The House then adjourned.
ArrGRsooE.
|, HoUsE.-Petition ofJamcs Crary. of
Ohio, grandson ofCol. Archibald Cra-
Il ry. for payment Of an old claim in iav-
or of said Archibald, was referred TO
Special Committee.
Petition William Sprague and 9th
els, for Peoples Savings Bank, contin-
ued with order of notice.
Petition for ckarter of New England
Telegraph Company, was continued
with an order of notice.
The bill 10 exempt homestead. from
attachment, was reported back, by the
'ommltiec on the Judiciary, who set
torlI, lh.t legislation on the subject is
unnecessary
Mr.. Porter differed with the commit
tee aud advocated lie passage Of the
\ bill. II reserved Il triilc-- shelter. and
the small lot OF ground on which it
sood-to the honest debtor and his fam
II lily; the dishonest debtor could always
save something from Tie general wreck
Il II discouraged that sort of credit which
was tascd on the expectation Of crcdi-
tors, Of grasping, finally, the lirle home
OF his debtor 1t encouraged the young
man TO build himself home, and it
| strengthened the hand and heart OF the
aged man, when he needed shelter for
his withcrcd limbs and whi,rned locks.
Mr.. Porter spoke at some length in lav-
or OF Icgis ali II on lhis,suhject. and urged
that it was the duty OF the Assembly to
respond to II growing feeling in the State
in favor Of homes for the poor
n Mr.. Bosworth thought the law was
now liberal enough toward debtors. He
was for remembering that creditors also
had rights and while our present iber-
Il al laws, in the matter of collecting debts,
remained in force, he VAS opposed to
! another ttcp in the direction of lberali-
! ty.
Il Mr.. Davis ,wouId not defend our pres
/ ent laws for the collection of debts He
would admit lhat they were loose, and
that they subjected the State to ridicule.
But he insisted that the PROPOSED law
was neither extravagant nor unjust. 1t
was an act Of justice to the toiing fami
| ly Of the hard working man. 1t vas
II calculated to make men honest. by TAX
/ ing away from them any excuse or plea
for dishonesty in the effort to save them
selves from utter ruin. II made men
industrious, and it made them virtuous
! also. IT gave them a home, an inter
est in the 5 ate, and spirit ollndepen-
/ dcnce-of true manlincss. Mr.. ID. re-
fcrred to the fact that similar laws to
/ the one proposed had been enacted in
many other States--in New York, Maine,
. Vermont, and most Of the young West.
, ern States, and expressed the hope that
+ il this law should not now pass, mem
bcrs OF the House would give their
thoughts TO the subject OF it, and be
ready 10 act tandngly at another
time.
i Mr.. Sheffield spoke against the bill
Things were very well as they stood,
and as they had stood ever since the
first Legislation on this subject in Rhode
Island.
Mr.. Fcnner Brown spoke very ear
nest,y IN favor of the bill. He had new
er had his feeling wrought upon as
when he had seen families driven 10
/ give up their homes, because they had
been unfortunate, and had fallen into
the grasp of unrclcnting creditors. lie
knew that the attachment to the home
stead was one Of the strongest feelings
that lived ~ tie breasts Of men and he
know that III tendency was 10 cnnobc
mm and make him independent and
yl..wr- t.r hoped the bill would pass
.i. Amos vas opposed 10 the bill for
We r,a-,H> offered hv MIR Boswor,h
aud because It would InIure the credit
of poor men. He spoke al some 'ength
aud quite eloqucntly against it denoun-
cling it as unjust and anIi-democratc
aud as rev wing the ieudal system Of
ollrn times.
Mn Davis said we hfd the speeches
OF three lawyers against this bill, and
the sum ami substance Of them was sim
ply thls--that Our present laws permit
ted any number of villains To keep their
property from their creditors, 10y fraud
and that therefore honest men should be
stripped of their last dollar. II they had
any other argument against the bill
they had not offered 1t here. lie would
not take up the time of the House. IN
showing that all ihis talk did not meet
the question, and did not touch the sub.
ject. II was talk against the present
law, which he would help these gentle
men to alter, whenever he should be
called upon
Mr.. Davis said this bill by no means
proposed TO revive the fcudal system.