, 1862-06-19

These classes Of cases are absolutely beyond and
without the constitution: And therefore It only
has been placed by the statute upon the common
Law pract1ce Of arrest Oh n,e*ne process, and Sec
eR f. t. il hsq &E The aay f Rds Rpt IN tba1t
that the plaintiff shall be entitled to q sapias
sfthe bersnt of whatesez Judgment may be ob.
ne win BE- Il Or pstapg psa 9 aaest 16a
taeid sh e 1sots ST. was heia q 1e the
a{aidayit m1st, alec get forth. not only that
cnmstanccs az show that the debtor has been gull
ty Of fraud, or that raise strong presumption Of
haud. Consequently, the lay. as thns expounded,
Constitution, well as tho statute to make an ~
reEt ynldG,
But does the law require the plaintiff to get
forth in his affidavit the facts and circumstances
on which his belief te founded that his debt will
be in danger ulless the defendant be held tn ball.
ae web as those which Disclose The fraud? As yet
the1e has been no adjudication On this question
and II 1a not necessary that any opinion upon Il
Shit MD be expressed. T think ii may be regarded
as clear thai il such tac,s and c.carastaaees are
att forth, and that they aftlrmattVefy show no
ground for rational belief that the debt will bo in
uauger un1csB the defendant is held to bali in that
case the affidavit naE be adladged to be INSULT
| cicnt On motion TO discharge bail, especially
where the facts alleged for this belief in this
case, are wholly denied by the affidavit Of the de-
citsd. The CO court is authorized to discharge bail
upon satisfactory proof; and where the affidavit OF
tie plaintiff IL inconc1uslye, improbable OF unsat,
changed By counter affidavit OF the defendant.
The affidavit on u which the capias IN this case is
| sued, alleges 'lhat the defendant Is long resi-
dent and wealthy citizen Of Chicago; that he Il
8 yery large and extens1ve land and real estate
owner, and that he is reputed to be ozth and has
declared that he Is worth three hundred thonsaat
dollars - aid that by reason Of his large catat.
and consequent social position, she has suslainee
damages to the amount Of $50.No; THAT he ha
hs be qP i6e m o Ss eu e
t tat She believes tat be is about to dispo1
M pu1poae m & defraudi6g Tie pIaintid out d der jus
tights. All thsee allegations are explicitly denie
by the defendant There ls realiy something imp-t
: bsb1e in the idea that man who is worth MOI
extensive business, whoae ramifcations extend Il
; beyond this city, thould suddenly eel out h
property ard c1sae up hls business especially In t
r abelief
This allegation that the party Is about to dispo
3 Of his property with fraudulent intent would
+ it, elf, constitute sufficient ground tor capias
alleged With such details as tie il
+ requires, and not as here upon mere bell
q founded npon an alleged verbal obseTyatdon Of Il
!. nnGer oath. But this was not the purpose +
Q which it WAS stated, and would not have been 81
fcient, as stated, Iii had heen- Upon this groun
therefore, thai satisfactory proof exists in the
| 65aEit on which the capias' was Issued, and
e the counter affidavit Of the defendant, thai Il
u order for tal has been ye1atfouely and tmpro,
. deatly made and that the benefit Of whateE
le Judgment the plaintiff may obtain will not be
G. DANGER the motion TO discharge bail is suetaiue
o1 This order will In no wise prejudice the plaintiff
10 rights upon trial OF the cause upon Its mett
P a1d is therefore made With less cmbarrassm
" than might otherwise be felt.
t. Van Amin and Martin In support Of motto
4c Eefser and Dow for the respondent,