DEBTORS, IMPRISONMENT OF (ante). There is little left of imprisonment for debt in any of the United States. In New York, an net for its abolition was passed in 1831. Its main provisions are that no person shaft be imprisoned in civil service, at law or in execution in equity founded on contracts, except in the following cases: In actions for fines and penalties, or on promises to marry, or for moneys collected by any public officer, and in actions for any misconduct or neglect in office, or in any professional employment. Moreover, in cases of debt claimed in any suit or founded upon any judgment or decree of a court of record, the defendant may be arrested upon an affi davit of the plaintiff stating the sum due to be more than $50, and charging the com mission of certain fraudulent acts; as, that the defendant is about to remove any of his property out of the jurisdiction of the court to defraud his creditors, that lie fraudu lently conceals property, or has assigned, removed, or disposed of it with like intent, or that the debt was fraudulently contracted. The defendant is thereupon commited to prison, unless he pay the debt and costs of the suit or give security to pay them within a certain time, or unless he make an assignment of his property for the benefits of his creditors, or give security that he will make such an assignment, or that he will not dis pose of any of his property until the demands against him are satisfied. If he make such
an assignment of his property, there are provisions in the act by which he may be dis charged from his indebtedness. Further provisions of an analogous nature to those contained in this act were embodied in the New York code, adopted 1848. The debtor may be arrested and imprisoneti either on mcsne or on final process. The principal grounds of arrest are, with few exceptions, the same as those enumerated in the previous act. The defendant, when arrested upon mesne process, may lie admitted to bail. The imprisonment upon final process is for the same causes, and is applicable when the exe cution against the debtor's property has been returned unsatisfied, in whole or in part. The most important difference between these provisions and those of the earlier statute is that, in the recent act, means arc provided only for securing the payment of the debt of an individual creditor, and there is no assignment provided for in behalf of all the creditors, or any means afforded of obtaining a discharge of the debtor from all his obligations. A large number of the states have adopted similar statutes.