Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1868-11-12


Mr., langdon, Of New Haven, moved /,
amend by inserting marriages" nwsl,
as births aud deaths,
Opposed by Mr., Messrs, Gleed Of M.
ristown, and ilinekley. Of Chelsea and
favored by Mr. Wheeloek Of Berlin, whn
moved that the bill be reeommitted 10 the
committee on education for amendment,
which was agreed To-
Mr. Pngree, OF Weathersfeld, called
up Senate bill No 10, relating TO ohat,el
mortgages, the question being on the
amendment proposed by Mr. Fisher, that
no mortgage OF personal property shall te
valid without the consent Of the wife IN
writing
Mr., Fisher, Of acknowledgement the
amendment and was opposed to the bill.
Mr. Miner, Of Manchester. concurred with
Mt Fisher in us remarks, he was opposed
10 the bill as was Mr. Hunt, Of St Al
bans.
Mr., Fisher, Of Westminster, by unani.
nous consent withdrew his proposed
amendment, which also introduced the
amendment Of Mr., Pingree, Of Weather.
field, which he Immediately renewed,
Mr.. Cristy, OF johnson, said the Legis-
lature had exempted large doss of prop
/ erty from attachmcnt--no less than ST..
0O0-and we have thereby very much re-
stricted the credit Of men Of small means.
lie thought il we would adopt this amend.
ment and then pass the bill thereby Civ
! ing the man the means 10 raise money on
mortgage of personal property, by and
with the consent Of the wife IN writ.
ing.
Mr. Hunt. of ST. Adams. very foreibly
[ opposed not only the amendment, but the
original bill, as an outrage upon justice.
I We have already exempted from $1,000
To $500 from attachment, but much more
than that II NJ 90 into Addison county
and purchase ten sheep. lie Said he
knew enough Of married life TO know that
the consent Of the wife could be obtained
at any time, He was opposed 10 the
whole thing.
Mr. Pingree, of Weathcrsfcld, favored
the amendment and the bill.
Mr. Hunt further opposed the bill, say.
ing ii fayors the mere money lender,
whom he detesied. He respected the
man of wealth as such, but he stigmatized
as soavengers the mere money lender,
And this bill opens the doors to give
this class another chance at the personal
property. lie hoped it would not BE-
: passed.
The amendment proposed by Mr.. Pin.
gree was then agreed to; ayes ~, nays
"a.
Mr. Hall, of Grotou, said that hc knew
from personal experience that the making
of such a law had been had in New Hamp-
shire; and pointed out the difficulties
that have arisen under 1t III that State,
He hoped the State Of Vermont would not
adopt such measure.
Mr.. Converse of Woodstock said he was
opposed to the bill in committee, and that
in addition TO the objections named by
the gentleman from Groton, 1t would
work bad for the purchaser as well as the
seller Property might be under mort
gage in one part of the State, and taken
b.. to another part Of the State, and sold To
n an innocent party, who could not safely
purchase it without going to the part OF
the State from which the property come
and looking up the records in the town
clerks office. He hoped some one would
give some good reason for its passage,
Mr.. Park, of Bennington, said If we art
to have general mortgage law, We should
define what classes of property 1t shall
apply to. Certain classes of personal
!, property it might do to allow to be mort
. rrg9d-such ~ il stationary, and not IL
able to be made use of to defraud honest
lpurchascrs and mortgagees. The statutes
; he thought, now covers all that is necessa
If ry.
l. Mr. Morris, of Manchester, said the Law
proved "a clog on the business OF the State
q and hoped it would not be passed.
d The passage OF the bill was then unanl
mously refused
I On motion of Mr. Wright, of Bradford
adjourned.