Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1862-11-20

The following is an abstract of an il,
ing discussion which took place in tba g
on Thursday, upon the Senate bill 10 q,
the distribution of the property Of h,,
debtors With the merits, or defects Il
the particular bill nnder considarof
not acquainted; but we are strongly
opinion that the law as it now stands i n
unjust to the debtor and the creditors
duces strife among creditors to N A.
break up the debtor the moment he h..
embarrassed, While the lortupat. -.
who succeeds in this strife is satisfied
sacrifice very likely of all the debtors M
ty,much ofwhich came from the remaj6in,
itors, 1.-THE latter with as just claims are oor
ly deprived ofall participation il the "A
The debtor too is burdened beyond bor
the sacrifice of all his property to discbar,
debt due the creditors first in the field
is opposed o the law of most other Stat.
opposed to humane and equitable princ
We hope some method NAV, Al lao,
devised to i'm prove our laws IN m,
spect; ,......
Mr.. Richardson said that he did moi 4
liberty to vote against the bill without .
his reasons. He did not think the \
quired by the State. a law which
work well in commercial communists h
not necessarily work well in Vermont
thought the Judiciary COMMITTEES wena
taken in suppos!ng that onr decrease IN i,
lation and wealth was owing to the sbsen,
any general insolvency law Our laws
now liberal and generous toward any
all manufacturing interests, and wealth
not prevented from embarking in these
prises from any unfayorable leg station,
Mr.. Richardson, showed from the stains
that in the production of butter, cheese. q
as well as in manufactures, Vermont ma
better showing from a comparison of the
1850 and 60 than any other New Enc
State He claimed that Vermont in Al
pursuits of industry and manufacturing
ted to the State, was Increasing as ra
as any other State, He would 90 as d
any other man in mercy to poor debtor
he believed it would be far better for the
ais of the community to hold people strict
the obligations of their contracts.
Mr. Edmunds spoke in favor of the b
He believed in the general principle that 4
itors ought to share equally in the, debt
goods, inasmuch as the debtors properI
made up Of all the credits he has obtained
said that when a debtors property mus
given up to his creditors, it was only a a
ton whether, under the law as it now
shall be given to portion Of the CREDITOR
be divided equally among them all.
He said, in reply to Mr.. Richardson's
gument drawn from the census, that it still
manned a fact, that Vermont was behind
sister States in increase Of wealth and pop
ton. For this there must be some cause
was not in the climate, in the soil, IN the il
tutions, or in the number of'births in this 81
Our soil was as liberal and generous as
of any State,-our liberties were as caref
guarded, yet our Young men leave the II
almost as surely as the leaves fall. because
can better their condition elsewhere.
He took issue with Mr.. Richardson ii
spect to his showing from the rensns, |
claimed that from that, it in fact appeared
Vermont, with no natural inaptitude, was
entirely behind the other New England 81
in manufactures and general industry.
He did not claim that the bill would ii
once a sovereign remedy for this want OF
pitaity. He believed it would, however,gr |
ually work the cure ofthese evils, and as u
ly as the harvest is gathered from the SOW
of the seed. -
The analogy of the distribution Of tb |
tates of deceased persons was torclbly urged
an argument in favor of a similar dist1bntI
of the property of these debtors, whoa a
PEELED to give up their property to their cre|
tors.
He said that the present bill, if 1t becoaj
law, would remove from creditors the temp
ton to break up business men, who hapla
be temporarily embarrassed, for the SAKE
securing the whole of their debts, and al |
same time would stimulate debtors to m
every nerve to pay all their debts and 4
debtor was hopeessly insolvent, he mgql \
by giving up his property, get a discnaI
and have future hope before him at hGa|
and not be compelled to 90 to other fields wheI
business and enterprise are invited BY lrieno
legislation. j
Mr.. Clark Of Bennington, said he regard
it his duty to give his reasons for voting agal
the bill. He was well convinced Of the n(|
rors of the present attachment system, anu
great waste of property often occasloneu
it. But he was not persuaded that tGS \
was the remedy required. We needed 'o
system which would rescue the StGte iroI
bankruptcy and wrecks Of fortunes when
had witnessed for the last fifty years, \
which he believed were among the elecN
this shark practice Of attachment. rms y
tenn was so cruel in its operations tIla
merciful instincts had even led US to SF1
muddy and apologetically of the frauds res
ted to to evade the law. He honored the .
ator (Mr. Edmunds) for the generous Ia "a,
with whica he worked to persuade the oAI
to relax the unwise and babarous system
attachment, but he believed this bull was y
comprehensive enough to reach the evil ~
he felt compelled to vote against 1t.
The silver snake mystery, which T..
years ago excited so much the people O s: ~
York, is solved at last. The hotel al on .,I
Lake, in Perry, Wyoming County, tI'D d
took fire, and in removing some ruop 's.ad
Al. cttIlll