Page:United States Reports, Volume 1.djvu/164

Rh 

1785.

were ftill here, but were about to remove without giving fecurity to their creditors. In the ʃecond act it is ftated, ‘‘ that divers irre

‘‘gularities and fraudlent practices had happened to the injury

‘‘of fuch creditors as were willingly to accept an equal fhare of the

‘‘ effects of their debtors ; ’’ and from thefe general expreffions we are left to confider, to which of the foregoing defcriptions of debtors the preamble refers. It could not be the firft ; they refiding abroad, and their effects coming here only occafionally, there was NO great danger of fraudulent practices ; and fo it appears by the fubfequent law ftill continuing the fame remedy againft them. With refpect, however, to the other two claffes it was poffible for a creditor to feduce his debtor to leave the province, or to entrap him within the conftruction of the law, and to feize upon all his effects. The act, therefore, makes an entire new provifion with refpect to both the latter defcriptions of perfons, and confolidates the two cafes. It mentions nothing of perfons abfenting themfelves cut oƒ the province, nor of perfons refufing to give fecurity ; but enacts, generally, that all perfons who had abʃconded from their ufual place of abode for fix days, with defign, they were perfons whofe effects the Legiflature intended fhould be divided among their creditors. To fay that they muft be ftill remaining in the province, would be needlefsly reftraining the generality of the words of the act, which fuggefts that fometimes they may have left the province, by the words ‘‘ and had

‘‘not leƒt a clear eftate in fee fimple within the province, fufficient to

‘‘pay their debts.’’

The laft claufe of the fecond act provides, that ‘‘ nothing in this

‘‘ act fhall be conftrued to exempt the goods or effects of any per

‘‘fons, not inhabitants of this province, from being attach-

‘‘ed according to the directions of the former act. ’’ Here appears a defigned variation from the expreffion ufed in the firft act :  it does not fay perfons not refiding in the province at the time oƒ iʃʃuing the attachment,  but, generally, perfons  not inhabitants oƒ the province,  and feems exprefly meant to take in only thofe perfons firft described in the former act, perfons who never refided here, or whofe actual refidence was in another country. A contrary conftruction would defeat the general intention of the Legiflature, as in moft cafes thofe debtors who efcape from their creditors, go out of the ftate. Nor is it material as to the policy of the act, whether he remains in the ftate or goes out of it ; he has committed an act fimilar to an act of bankruptcy by abfconding with a fraudulent defign ; and in that cafe, and in that only, is he the object of the fecond act.

The word ‘‘ inhabitant’’ has a plain meaning. A perfon coming hither occafionally, as a captain of a fhip, in the courfe of trade, cannot be called an inhabitant ; nor does a perfon going from his fettled habitation here, on occafion of bufinefs to Boʃton, or any other place, ccafe to be an inhabitant. But a man who comes from Rh