date

1 Aug. 1812 Evidence Introd
1 Aug. 1812

Evidence Introd

Introd

Ch. 26 Imp[?]

' Bad for compulsion

3. Upon the face of it to the purpose in question, the infliction in question does it carry any sufficient promise of being effectual? Not it indeed.

At the charge of the Debtor himself effectual it can not be, in so far as property to the amount in question property fails of being in his /at his/ possession is at his command.

At the charge of any other person, in the character of friend, prompted by sympathy to release /relieve/the Debtor from this infliction, that it should be effectual, is not for the common good of all persons concerned is not as hath[?] being shewn already a desirable result desirable.

At the charge of the Debtor himself, where these necessary means are actually at his command, its efficiency, managed as it is is in a high degree imperfect in comparison of what is most obviously might and ought to be.

To the many a bill, to the comparatively few a prison is though not /not indeed/ a paradise but however a place of comfort: of comfort obtained at the expence of the injured creditor, by /from/ the interested connivance of the Judge.

Solitary confinement - to the purpose to which it /this severe infliction/ is least well adapted, for the purpose of punishment as in a most inordinate degree been with the most unthinking levels but too often applied. Solitary confinement continued for two years together, and the victim not yet [..?] broken nor reduced to a state of melancholy madness.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1 Aug 1812 Evidence Introd]
    Description: 1 Aug 1812

    Evidence Introd

    Introd

    Ch. 26 Impris[?]

    '.2 Bad for compulsion

    To the correcting out of the grasp of the depredator the property of his Creditor, nothing that has ever been known by the name of torture, supposing it necessary and at the same time actually effectual or but for the wilful default of the debtor effectual would be misapplied. For if having the property at his command rather than give it up to him to whom it is due he choses /as to his choice/ to endure this torture, the proof is altogether conclusive that be the intensity of the looker what it may, be experience in the (idea) of the detention, he experiences from whatsoever course, a [...?] and more than equivalent, howsoever malignant and unenviable a pleasure.

    Happily to the production of the desirable result, no such no such supposition, as such alarming no such dangerous instrument is necessary no such instrument is so effectually conducive and the familiar indeed too familiar and simple instrument solitary confinement /in prison solitude/.

    Two years has scarce satisfied the unfeeling /[...?]/ and unthinking severity by which it has been applied to the purpose of punishment: two weeks would in most if not in all instances suffice for the purpose of compulsion thus directed: for the purpose of compelling disclosure and surrender of effects for the benefit of creditors.

    Of suffering in the character of an instrument of compulsion operating by its intensity, as in the case of what is commonly understood by the name of torture it is a property by the stimulus applied to the mind, to excite such a degree of resisting force as has /hath/ sometimes been found sufficient to prevent the attainment of the object aimed at by it. Of solitary imprisonment, especially if alone employed as an instrument of compulsion accompanied as it ought to be with spare diet and perpetual darkness it is the property[?] to break the spirit as the phrase is, to weakness into the mind /marked [...?]/ the desired and solitary weakness, to deprive it of the power of applying what in the present case is by the supposition unjust resistance.
  • Title: [1 Aug. 1812 Evidence Introd]
    Description: 1 Aug. 1812

    Evidence Introd

    Introd

    Ch.26. Impris.[?]

    ' Bad for compulsion

    From p.4

    2. To the accomplishment of the proposed object, viz. discharge of the debt, supposing a debt [...?] is this infliction necessary? Another point this concerning /in relation to/ which the Judge refuses to inform himself.

    Altogether unnecessary it is as often as the solvency of the alledged debtor is out of doubt.

    Back to p.4.
  • Title: [4 Aug 1812 Evidence Introd]
    Description: 4 Aug 1812

    Evidence Introd

    Introd

    Ch. 26. Imprisonment for debt

    '12. Agenda.

    1. Satisfaction to the creditor - in this may be seen that which ought to be the first object in case of debt.

    Satisfaction at whose expence? at the expence of the debtor himself, and not of any other person, those excepted such as his wife and family /children/ whose subsistence is dependent upon his.

    2. Next to satisfaction, comes punishment: - in the event of insolvency, i.e. deficiency in respect of the quantum of civil satisfaction - but in what case? in a case where on the part of the insolvent debtor there have been no [...?]? To a question of this sort so far from finding it possible to say /answer/ yes, common sense can not for shame to answer simply and without apology in the negative.

    And note that on this /as on other/ occasions every infliction - every afflictive application suffering - producing in respect of whatsoever evil is produced by it voluntarily made which might be avoided and[?] is not avoided may be and ought to be placed to the account of punishment.