The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-11-09

the manner in which he shall execute the
, uulles OF his office. In the case of an ar,-
'horiHeu person, serving process, such per-
, son Is some ono selected by the plaintiff to
execute an arbitrary rule, and Is quite like
" |" annoy the defendant by taking such
properly us he ought not to take. This
CHECK oi mar fees was a very wise one
placed upon the employment of such I'M
authorized persons TO prevent the abuses to
Whlcn mat practice is susceptible He
.nougnt tiis Dill was Il dangerous one and
ought not to pass.
Mr.. Davenport said the gentleman from
Jamaica admits the injustice of allowing
tuii ices Tor serving precepts retnrnable to
one court, and only one-half fees for serv-
ing similar preccpt returnabe to another
court. The effect of the law as il now is.
Is to compel the plaintiff to pay additional
fees than what are allowed by law, that he
may secure the service OF his prccept
Better give full fees to those who are called
upon to serve all precepts, and compel
Justices to see to ii that none but suitable
persons are SO employed.
Mr.. Eddy replied that the design of the
law was to allow authorized persons to
serve process. only when duly authorized
person could not reasonably be had and
SUCH person should not have full fees, civ
ing no ponds for the faithful performance
of his duties.
The third reading of the bill was then re-
fused. Ayes, g.; nays, 1914.
From general committee In favor of II.
Il, relating to the registry of marriages and
Oirtns, WIN amendment requiring the head
OF the FAMILY to make oath to the truth of
the statements made by them, which was
agreed to, and the bill read the third time
and passed.
From the distributing committee against
Ii. 300 to pay Wick Brown the sum there
in named; third reading refused.
From the committee on judiciary against
ii. ia, relating to liens at law; third read
ing refused.
From the com nittec on highways. bridges
and ferries, in favor of II. 1863 in amend
mert OF an act approved Nov. &c, 1872, re-
gulatlng the width of rims on felloes of the
wheels of freight wagons, with proposals
of amendment fixing the width Of the rim
for one ton load at tea inches, which was
agreed TO. Ayes, 10; nays. 20.
Mr.. Abel of West Haven moved that the
bill be dismissed
The merits of the bill were discussed by
Mr.. Eddy of Jamaica, Mr.. Bartholomew
of Benson, Mr.. Houston of Victory, Mr..
Holden of Clarendon, Mr.. Wells of CRANKY.
MIR. Davenport of Wilmington, and Mr.
| Davis OF St. Adams.
The bill was then dismissed by a very
decided vote.
From the committee on claims in favor
of 5. ia pay George W. Crawford the
sum therein named. read third time and on
motion OF Mr. Powell of Ricbford was Or
dered to lie
From committee on claims, favor of II.
219, to pay Chas. NJ. Whitaker the sum
therein named, with proposal of amend
ment fixing the sum at 5000 which was
agreed to, the bill was read the third time
and passed.
Mr.. Wells of CRANKY called up II. 245,
to amend an act approved Nov. 90, 1870,
entitled IAN act to extend the provisions of
an act entitled an act to establish State
Normal school, approved Nov. II, 1861
The bill was then read the third time. as
amended by proposal of committee and
! passed.
Unfinished business H. 60 to amend
sec; "a, cnap. l2O, q. 3, was taken up as
unfinished business.
Mr.. DAVIS of st. Adams said that all that
was wanted was to know just what this
Dlil proposed To DO There were two kinds
OF action one called tort, and another
founded on contract. Under actions of
tort If the debtor is confined In iail ON
what is called close Jail execution, there
is an avenue by which the prisoner can
reach the ear of the court and on his oath
that lie Is not able 10 pay his debts the
courts can IN their discretion admit the
person to the limits of the Jail yard In.
der the second class of cases there is now
no means by which person who is in TAIL
on certified execution can be allowed 10
make statement of his circumstances and
he admitted to the same limits as in actions
of tort. He believed that when the law to
which this bill is an amendment was enact
cd II was an oversight in shutting out the
cases that come under the second class of
actions. Without this amendment such
persons are forever shut out from the ear
OF the court and must forever remain i'm
jail. lie did not believe that the man
holding funds in fiduciary capacity. and
misapplyng those funds was any more |
criminal than the man who wilfuly stole |
the same amount from his neighbor And |
yet he is put under heavier penalties in the |
first case than in the last; and to relieve
himself of the heavier penalties of appro.
priatlng money held in tidaciary capacity
to his own use, he had bettor go and steal
the amount necessary to pay the creditor in
the one case and suffer the penalty of theft.
This bill but puts an unfortunate class of
men in position where they can make a
statement of the facts in their cases, but if
he deserves lenlency, be admitted Ia the
limits of the Jail
Mr.. Davenport of Wilmington thought
there was undue effort to pass this bill.
The house had once deliberately decided
against its passage, and he protested against
this constant reconsideration of questions.
lie was opposed to the bill and read from
the statutes to shoM that there was proyis-
IN in ha In |
these cases, and it was unnecessary to leg
islate any further. He spoke at length
against the bill, saying that we are passing
bills here every day to pay men to catch
rogues; and now we are asked to pass this
bill 70 enable these same rogues to get out
OF jail through the ear of the court We
better act consistently and kill this bill at
once.
MIR. Hyde of Castleton, said that in re-
gard to the statement made here this morn ,
ing that the house passed similar bill to ,
THIS over Governor Dillingham's veto, but
we were net told that the senate refused to
pass the bill over the veto. He then stated {
he particulars of the case, ofwhich so much !
s said, to which he believed this bill was ,,
Intended to apply, and said it appeared to
him that this bill was very much in the :
ame class as the shack pay of which we a
lave heard so much. 1t is retroactive in 5
Is provisions, which is against the policy of
he state, and such legislation is objection
'ble in every particular,
Mr.. Munson of Manchester, in explana-
ion of the case OF which so much has been
aid, read from the advance sheets of the
ase as published in the reports of the de-
isions of the supreme court, and to give q
he house the whole case he read the !
ull report and decision of the case as 4
bout to be published. He then suggested Q
hat those gentlemen who are SO urgent Is
gainst the passage of this bill, were afraid
0 have the debtor in this particular case
rought before an impartial judge lest JUS
ice should be done and the debtors re- i
uest be granted. He did not believe there q,
vas any more criminality in this case than
thousands of cases where no crimnality