Mr. CRAGIN. Mr. President, the Senate will bear me witness that since I have occupied a place in this Chamber I have consumed but very little time in speaking. I aim never to speak upon any occasion unless I think I have something to say pertinent to the subject under debate, and to say that in the shortest time possible. I make no factious opposition to this bill; but I felt it my duty on a former occasion to vote against it without giving any reason for that vote. Since that time I have received several anonymous letters from men in NewYork, rePresenting themselves as NewHampshire men, abusing me for that vote. Believing as I did on the former occasion, and as I now believe, that the people of NewHampshire, whom I rePresent, are almost unanimously opposed to this measure. I then felt it my duty to vote against it, and I still feel it my duty to vote against it. I admit that there are many men in this country who would be benefited by this bill if it should be enacted into a law and who ought to be benefited; but at the same time I can see that there is a large class who deserve no benefit under it who will avail themselves of its provisions. If the bill could have been amended in 2 particulars, notwithstanding I believe the people of my State are overwhelmingly against iit loff have voted for it, and would now do so. If the amendment offered by the honorable Senfrom Massachusetts [Mr. will so N] had been adopted so that no man could be discharged from his indebtedness unless he could pay 50 cents on the dollar or receive the consent of a majority of his creditors, it would have recommended the bill to me. Then if the amendment offered by the honorable Senfrom Missouri [Mr. HENDERson] placing the limit of indebtedness at $1,000 before a man could voluntarily take the benefit of this act had been adopted, it would have also commended it to my approbation, and with those 2 amendments. have voted for this bill. There is no reason on earth why a man owing simply $300 should be discharged from this little debt when he may owe that to a man worth much less than himself; for under this bill a man may be worth 1000s of dollars and yet be discharged from his debts. I remember the operations of the bankrupt law passed in 1841. I remember that the odium that attached to that measure mainly arose from the little suits, from the men who owed comparatively nothing, who were indebted in the sum of a few dollars or a few 100 dollars, going in and taking advantage of that measure, and thus creating litigation, thus making the thing infinitely odious. A man that owes only $300 is not a man who is worth much to the community, whose energy should be relieved, as we are told, by this measure. As I said before, he may be indebted to men worth much less in property than himself. But, sir, the main reason why I voted against the bill before, and shall do so now, is that I believe the people whom I rePresent are over whelmingly opposed to it. I have received but one single letter from my State in favor of this bill, and that was from a lawyer who said to me that the law business in his community was very dull, and he hoped the bankrupt bill might pass, so as to give more business to the legal profession. [Laughter] That is the only letter that I have received in favor of the passage of this bill from any man in my State, whereas I have received 100s from men who are opposed to it upon general principles.