( 1 ) ▁of ▁the ▁Constitution ▁in app lic able : ▁▁ ▁The ▁legisl ation ▁in ▁question ▁did ▁not ▁ins ist ▁on ▁the ▁exhaust ion ▁by ▁the ▁cred itor ▁of ▁his ▁less er ▁rem ed ies ▁before ▁he ▁threw ▁the ▁book ▁of ▁pros pective ▁imprison ment ▁at ▁the ▁deb tor . ▁ ▁It ▁allowed ▁the ▁deb tor ▁to ▁be ▁imprison ed ▁without ▁a ▁hearing . ▁The ▁notice ▁issued ▁by ▁the ▁cred itor , ▁although ▁served ▁in ▁accord ance ▁with ▁the ▁R ules ▁of ▁the ▁Mag istr ates ' ▁Cour ts , ▁might ▁have ▁been ▁left ▁with ▁somebody ▁else ▁at ▁one ▁of ▁the ▁places ▁permitted ▁for ▁its ▁service , ▁and ▁never ▁have ▁come ▁to ▁the ▁deb tor ' s ▁personal ▁attention . ▁The ▁stat ute , ▁however , ▁express ly ▁emp ower ed ▁the ▁magistr ate ▁to ▁sentence ▁the ▁deb tor ▁to ▁imprison ment ▁in ▁his ▁absence , ▁a ▁fate ▁never ▁suffered ▁even ▁by ▁conv icted ▁crim inals . ▁ ▁The ▁third ▁ob no x ious ▁effect ▁of ▁the ▁legisl ation ▁related ▁to ▁the ▁absence ▁of ▁the ▁deb tor ▁from ▁court , ▁even ▁when ▁he ▁had ▁received ▁the ▁notice ▁and ▁the ▁preceding ▁documents . ▁An ▁explanation ▁of ▁such ▁absence ▁might ▁be ▁the ▁deb tor ' s ▁ignor ance ▁of ▁the ▁various ▁def ences ▁that ▁were ▁available ▁to ▁him ▁in ▁answering ▁it , ▁in ▁particular ▁the ▁important ▁defence ▁of ▁a ▁pover ty ▁aff lic ting ▁him ▁which ▁was ▁not ▁att rib utable ▁to ▁his ▁own ▁improv idence . ▁The ▁deb tor ▁might ▁labour ▁under ▁the