THE BRIsCOE BILL,
{"newspaper_name": "Mississippi Democrat.", "edition": "01", "page": "pNone", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 4572, "word_count": 809, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9585000276565552], "ccnet_perplexity": [1409.800048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
for the Brscoe bill. Weafe sorry ID diI7s<
with him, but cannot consent 10 suppo,.l
/ any man for Judge, Or rnember III NJ,
: Legislature, who is in favor OF such XIII
or any other measure, the avowed ob;e,,


Of which il 10 legisate bank debtors out H
debt, or to change, in any possible man
\ ner, the existing contract between crediio,
and debtor" - Wing of Saturday.
II And zoe are sorry TO see thai the wb;g.


are thus making political opinion a lest II
| the election Of Judges; and are going q


prescribe Mr.. Lea because he has declared


that he believes the law, as il has stood X,


some four or five centuries, asto corpora.


tons, is proper TO be continued.


| Unheard Of and proscripiive, however.


as we consider the course few Of he


wings OF the district are pursuing towards


Mr.. Lea, we have not commenced this ar.


tcle for his defence; but to continue an ex.


animation into the policy and morality Of
the Briscoe Bul--an examination we com.


menced few numbers ago


The above extract from the Wing, gives
the popular view Of the superfciaI--th
view which the Wing out-cry against any


movement not recognizing The inialibility
and perfection Of their beautiful pets, ihe
banks, has succeeded IN imprsssing upon
many honest citizens


These repeated out-cries have persua.
ded many that this Briscoe bill is a terribIe
monster--worse than repudiation--iti,ro-
ducing total change in our laws, and for
the benefit Of few bank debtors, violQ.
ting contracts, trampling on public and
private morals, and doing divers and sundry
other unheard Of outrageous enormilics


Now, every lawyer knows that the Bris.
coe bill introduced no nep law, as TO what
should be the effect on forfeiture Of fran
chise by a corporation. II simpliies and
expedites the proceedings in our courts for
ascertaining whether charter has been
violated nothing more. II was every
where charged, few years ago, that ous
banks had violated their charters. Some
were for repeating them by our Legislature.
Others were for judicial investigation
under the old writ Of quo parranfo, which,
by the way, the whigs we're the first to in
sist, in our state, was the true mode Of deal
ing with bank charged with violating ls
charter. The Briscoe bill adopts this ,phig
Recommendation; and only directs in what
manner the judicial investigation shall
commence.


All this cant and complaint about legis-
latng people out Of debt--when charged
against the Briscoe Bill is arrant humbug-
gerry. The bill says not scord on he
subject Il does moi say whether The debts
to or from the Banks shall be cxtnguished
or not. Itleayes the effect Of a forfeiture
10 be settled by the law as it stands and
as il has stood since the days Of Littleton
and Coke. Il leaves ihe law ia force on
the chartering Of the banks 10 declare whe.
ther the debts shall be extIDguished or MOI,
Why then is all this out-cry against this
bill? II does not declare that the debts Of
corporation shall be extinguished on for
feiture Of charter. This is the maEdate Of
the common law. This is the effect of The
law as italready stood--an effect for which
neither the Briscoe bill, nor any other mod
ern Legislation is responsible. This isa
point on which we and tile friends Of tho
bill challenge denial. II is and mast be
admitted.


Is there now, or was there when tho
whig amendment was fastened on the orig
inal Briscoe bill any good reason why The
old law should be altered? We hold that
there was not.


The common law, Is boastod, is moth
ing more than common reason. The A.
merican States have adopted it from their
ancestors as the wisest system The world
has yet produced. 10 many respects il de-
serves all the eulogiums il receives; and
in no respect, in our opinion more than
in its stern rules and restraining penalties
as 10 corporators. We have seen enough
Of bank abuses in these days, and know
enough of the usurpalions OF corporations,
10 know that the severest measures are
needed TO restrain them to their charters.
Who will advocate the doctrine that cor
poration should be allowed 10 violate its
charter, or who would hesitate 10 affix se-
we're penalties to the violation? The wis
dom Of our ancestors has affixed q penalty
for such violation "a penalty which with.
out being very severe, is yet ample for re-
straint. That penalty attacks the very
passion which prompts 10 a violation of 4
bank charter. Il reaches The bunker thro
his avarice; and declares 10 him, as il does
10 The usurer: "If you yiolusc the law the
debt you make is void. s...


we believe this the best check 10 over