Romo weeks eince, m reviamg t he Stat n te?, an interesting debate eprung up n the House of Repreaentatives, on striking out the clause ptohibiting the taking of more thnn ten per cent interest. We wish we bad room toinEcrt the debate. Mr. Chubb, of this county, made some sensible rcumrks against continuing the absurd restriction, but the majority of the House were not enough enligh tened to sustain him. It appears that Gov. Felch, although quite conservative od many subjects, is richt on this poinl: for we find that in 1837, while this subject was under consideraron, Mr. Felch moved to amend the bill by striking out the three firet sections, ond inserting the followiug as a substituto for one of them. Thai il shall and may be lawfulfor any verson or personsto recover and reeeive on any contract her eajÃ¯cr made, such rale of interest as may be greed upon by the parties, and expressed in writing." See Journal of the House of Fnay, January 27th, 1837, pago 148. Wc are indebted to the Oakland Gazefto, Whig paper, forcalling ourattention tothis act. A correspondent of that paper brought l up before clection, as proof positive that Telch was for "ueury"- 'for removiDg all resraint upon the'merciless creditor,' - leaving the debtor a prey to avance and extortion,' kc. The course of Mr. Chubb will fÃnally prevn il .