Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1850-1854, 1852-04-09

From the Daily Wisconsin.
CT COLLECTION LAWS.
MADISON, March 30. 1870
YIN. Z. Cramer, Esq:


YIN. Z. Cramer, Esq:
DEAR SIR-I noticed in some of your coten.
r porarieS that the report and bill introduced by
myself and Mr.. Phelps into the Legislature, r.
, partially repeal the collection laws, is stcmaii.
I'D as Tom tooery in legislation, and the deay
; embodied as the offspring only Of weak and dis.
ordered minds. ! serd you appended an extract
from AColoch's Dictionary Of Commerce, a
standard English work, on this subject OF
course TINS Is not expected to affect towering
intc.,octs, ike unto those Of the editors of The
Naterio"n Chronicle Of the Milwaukee Sen
unel, and the Madison Assistant of the latter
bat tnose only who are some place in the neIoh
borhood of common humanity Ii may also he
gathered from this extract that the idea is not 81
remarkably new or noycl, and that it does NOT
owe lis origin entirely to myself, nor is it pecu!
iar to our own State.
Yours, e. LATHAM SuOLES.
I M'CrLlocH, page 45l, says:
The taking away the power of orrest and
! imprisonment, except in cases of frauduIeot
bankruptcy, would certainly be a material i'm
pTorement upon the existing system. But ,ya
are satisfied that il does no, 20 far enough and
that by fer the most desirable and most beneficial
. reform ta&t could be oItctcd in this department,
would be IL take aley al acijo, for dots under
/ q @lren sun, as ESQ or ElO0.
+ Ans would be a radical change certainly; but
we are fully satisfied il would be highly adysn.
taEeo4a t. every class OF the community, and
most o. a.. to .aoororS, retail dealers and small
NaiesWnn. Ii would protect the former from
+ oppression, at the Same time that il wunl tend
/ powerfully to render them more proydcnt and
cons. lerota; il would teach the latter 10 cyor-
/ else that discretion in the granting Of credit.
which IS 50 very Indispensable and it would be-
publicly benchclal by strengthening the moIal
pFnclp,e, and mHklng the contraction Of debts
for small sums, without the means of paving
them, at once difficult and disgraceful.
We agree entirely in opinion with those who
think that il IS no purpose 10 attempt to remedy
the defects now pointed out, by multiplying
courts and other devices for facilitating the spec
dy recovery of small debts This is beginning
at the wrong end or rather it is attempting to
obylatc the influence @! one abuse by instluiInr
another. No wise statesman will ever be easily
persuaded to fill the country with petty local
courts for these when not absolutely necessary.
are the mcrest instances Imaginable; and he
would at all events exert himself in the first IN
stance, to do away, IN so farms p ssible with the
circumstances that make individuals resort 10
them. But it is certain that ninc-tenths of the
cases in county courts, originate in questions
as to simple contract debts under IS; and were
such debts placed, as they ought 10 be, beyond
the pale Of the law, the courts would be wholly
unnecessary. Our object ought not to be to pro-
vide means for enforcing payment of trihng
debts, but to DrCUeDt their contraction. We be-
hcva indeed, that instead OF lCsscning, the null
DUPLICATION Of district courts Will materially az
orayaie, all the evils Of the present credit sys-
tcm. The belief that they may readily enforce
their claims hy rasortnr to them, will make shop
keepers and traaesmon still more disposed than