You will pardon, I am sure, the liberty of a citizen to one of his able and conspicuous representatives, if I request your consideration of the specifications contained in a recent publication here entitled a Disquisition on Imprisonment for Debt. I believe it has already been sent up to the Booksellers in Albany.

Imprisonment for Debt cannot, and will not be much longer practiced. It is, in fact, when rightly understood, what no man wants!

And it aught to be repeated, line upon line, and precept upon precept, till those who imagine they are advocates for Imprisonment for Debt, understand that all they or any desire is an honest surrender of the property. And that should be exacted from the Debtor even with the penalty of death, if necessary, as in England.

Even so, however, and I fear your proposition (if I understand it) to allow the Connecticut system of attachment, whereby one creditor is, there, enabled to seise all a Debtor's property, and put it under sequestration for his mere individual benefit, might be a dangerous in its practical results.

There (Con) where all business is done on a very close and careful scale, it does sometimes happen that a man is stopped in the full carreer of business by an attachment for a debt of inconsiderable amount.

I should be gratified to see your Bill and if you would do me the honour to enclose me a copy will endeavour that justice be done to it in the Gasettes of the City.