Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1858-01-19
ICONMUNI ED

THE REVISED CODE OF THE D1sTRIc1 oF Co.
LUNRIA.-Jn former communication we had oc
casich TO alludc incidentally to those provisions
oil the Code which relate TO the recovery of debts
ana we attempted to show that one of their bene-
nclal effects would be to keep down the rate of
interest There is reason TO fear, however, that
those provisions are but imperfecty understood
and that many persons are in danger of receiving
erroneous impressions concerning them by trust
ing to the artful sophstries of designing men
IL has been boldly asserted that the new Coae
attempts again to fasten on us the odious law of
imprisonment for debt. 1t has been said that
this District is 10 be turned into a great man
tap to catch the unfortunate of everv section of
the nion w no are unWarv enouCb IN s,en with
in its borders.
rms last sla lderous imputation is but sample
OF the gross misrepresentation of those who
avowlng their hostility to the whole Code, have
held up Tor TePrObdton those detached sections
or phrases against which they imagined the pop-
uiar orejudices might be enost readily excited
- long as the enemies Of the Code continue to
induiSe In vague 2eneralities and vdpid declama-
tlon, u viii be hard to tell What point their at
TICKS a!e directed against; but in this instance
we display To view the entire volume, and DEFY
any man to lay his finger upon the passage or
Passages which, either taken singly or put to-
Sether in any collocaton Whatsoever can be
made to bear the meaning which the public are
asked 10 put upon them; and we feel equally CON
uent that III the true secret of the objection were
dlsclosed, and If the objectors were known the
elect would be to commend these provisions of
the Code still more strongly to the favor of every
honest ard substantial citizen.
ihis "man trap what is 1t, The proposed
ntdchnsHt Iatc No, for the Code expressly
declares that no attachment shall issue in anv
case except for a cause of action arising within
this District Moreover, it does not authorize
an attachment of the defendants body, but only
OF his property. To saw then that ryeIy bard
hearted creditor in the land will have it in his
power to follow his debtor to the District of Co.
lumbia and, simply upon making certain afii-
udVlt, thioW him into prison. power which
tie laws of his own State county would not
perhaps, give him-such an assertion we say
would be simply ridiculous if it Were not viii
fully false.
This process of attachment is no innov,,,on q.
IL Is nothing more than partial restoration of
the law which existed in Mary Ia nd at the time
o. the cession of this District, and which con-
tlnueu 10 be In force until, not from any sense of
public utility, but to CRAFTY private ends il was
virtually repealed Under the old Common law
defendant might generally be required to give
Dal Inr MS appearance, or Imprisoned in default
Oi u, IN civil as well as in a criminal cause
some wears ago stranger from one of the
States, having been arrested at the instance of
one oil our citizens, and being unable to obtain
bdil, sent for representative in Congress from
his district. In twentyfour hours afterwards a
bill was passed through Congress- which under
the speciOus title of - An act to abolish imprIs
onment for debt in the District of ColumhI, ex
va Hdu tIc eUr''l OF Vlrtu-
ally Tepealing our foreign aitaC hInent insoIyent
laws. and inficting fatal injury upon CONNER
cial confidence. subsequently, (in 1857 under
precisely similar circumstances, and for a pre-
ci>ely similar private purpose another act was
passed, which completed the work Of destruc-
ton, swept away tn. last traces of our most val
nabie remedy, and left at the mercy of that
Irresponsible class Of persons who without hay-
ing any permanent residence in our community
constitute so large portion Of our population
and with whom our merchants and others have
most of their deali:gs.
For our own part we only regret that the Code
does not go further. and, Tepedlng these repeal
Ing statutes, authorize, some cases at least ar
rest and bail at the institution of a suit The
Code, however, contains no such prov SION and
hence u was that we could not conceive what II
wa that had been seized upon as a pret.xt for
this pretended alarm, unless it was the proposed
attachment law.