During the withholding of protection the debtor is at the mercy of his creditors, but the Act contains a provision that no insolvent shall be detained in custody at the suit of any creditor entered in the schedule for a longer period than twelve months. The "Protection Acts" apply both to traders and non-traders, the latter being unrestricted as to the amount of their debts, but traders owing less than £300 are alone qualified to petition. He (the Lord Chancellor) had been under the impression, and he believed it was one generally entertained, that practically the Insolvent Acts applied only to non-traders and the Bankrupt Acts to traders; but a communication which he had received from one of the Commissioners of the Insolvent Debtors' Court had, to his great surprise, shown a very different state of facts. It appeared that in London from the 1st of January to the 12th of December last year there were 1,024 protection cases, of which no less than 816 were cases of traders, while the small residue only were the petitions of persons who had not been engaged in trade. In the country the facts were still more surprising; for it appeared, from a return of country cases during two years and a half, that of 4,230 applications for protection, only fifty were those of non-traders. Had it not been for the existence of the Protection Acts, all those humble traders would have been compelled to go to prison in order to obtain the benefit of the Insolvent Act, or they must have had their affairs arranged by the expensive process of the Bankruptcy Court. Having thus explained to their Lordships the position in which the law of insolvency now stood, he should proceed to introduce to their notice the state of the existing law with respect to the administration of insolvent estates in the Court of Bankruptcy, which might be considered to have assumed its present form of jurisdiction in the year 1831. Previous to that period the estates of a bankrupt were administered in London by seventy Commissioners, composed of barristers and solicitors, whose names were distributed over several lists, and before any one of which it was at the option of the person who had the conduct of the Commission to choose the Commissioner to whom he desired the case to be submitted. By the Act of 1831, however, those seventy Commissioners in London were reduced to six, which constituted at present the maximum number in the metropolis. A Court of Re In view was also established under the operation of the Act as a Court of Appeal, from which tribunal, however, a right of appeal lay to the Lord Chancellor, and under certain circumstances to the House of Lords, without the necessity of submitting the case to the Court of Chancery in the first instance. With respect to the country Commissioners, he might state that it was enacted that they should be appointed by the Lord Chancellor upon the nomination of the Judges of the different Circuits, and in 1842 there were 700 of those Commissioners, who presided over 140 district Courts. He might further state that the Court of Appeal had, after a short trial, been found to be useless; that it had in consequence been abolished; that its jurisdiction had at first been transferred to a Vice Chancellor, and eventually to the Lord Justices, and the Lord Chancellor, who now, sitting either together or separately, constituted the Court of Appeal in Bankruptcy. the year 1840 a Royal Commission had been appointed to inquire into the state of the bankrupt law, and to suggest the introduction of such amendments into it as they might deem to be necessary. That Commission issued a very elaborate Report, in which they recommended, among other things, that the country Commissioners should be reduced in number, a recommendation which was acted upon, their number having in 1842 been diminished to a maximum number of twelve. The Report contained various other recommendations also, some only of which were adopted. In 1849, however, the whole of the bankrupt law had been reviewed, and all its provisions had been consolidated in one Act, which comprised the existing code upon the subject. That was done under the sanction of a Select Committee of their Lordships' House, and he thought he could not give a better illustration of the difficulty and delicacy of dealing with this subject than by stating that this measure, framed with so much care, and which had received so much of their Lordships' attention, worked so little to the satisfaction of the community, that within four years afterwards, in 1853, another Royal Commission was issued to inquire into and report upon the amendments that might be thought necessary in the Law of Bankruptcy, and to ascertain whether or not it stood in need of amendment. At the head of that Commission was his right hon. Friend the Secretary for the Home De He House adjourned at Seven o'clock, until HOUSE OF COMMONS, position by saying that his Bill was meant, | everybody would deplore; but whether it not to consolidate the entire law upon this was an evil that must be submitted to in subject, but to be a patch on the existing order to obtain great advantages was a system. His noble and learned Friend question for further consideration. looked forward to a complete consolidation would say no more on the present occasion, of the law at some future period; but why except that he thanked his noble and was it to be deferred? His noble and learn- learned Friend for introducing the measure. ed Friend had the opportunity now within Bill read la. his grasp, and not to avail himself of it would cause great disappointment to all persons who took an interest in the amendment of the law. The existing Bankruptcy and Insolvency Acts contained between 200 and 300 sections, and as his noble and learned Friend's measure proposed to repeal or alter about 150 of them, it would be quite as easy to reconstruct while improving the law; and he hoped it was not too late for his noble and learned Friend to apply himself to the larger and more desirable work. First thoughts were often the best, and he thought the scheme proposed by his noble and learned Friend towards the conclusion of last Session was, on the whole, a better one than the present. The improvements his noble and learned Friend had suggested were certainly very considerable, and seemed to deserve the approbation of their Lordships; but still he thought, instead of amending the existing system, they should have a new code by which they might hope to place the law of debtor and creditor on something like a satisfactory footing. Monday, February 7, 1859. MINUTES.] NEW WRIT ISSUED.-For Oxford Uni versity, v. The Right Hon. William Ewart Gladstone, Lord High Commissioner of Ionian Islands. PUBLIC BILLS.-10 Superannuation; Manor Courts, &c., (Ireland): Highways; Markets (Ireland); Sale and Transfer of Land (Ireland); Lunatic Poor (Ireland); Receivers in Chancery (Ireland), Abolition, &c.; Tramways (Ireland); Endowed Schools. 20 Occasional Forms of Prayer. THE QUEEN'S SPEECH-ANSWER TO THE COMPTROLLER OF THE HOUSE HOLD (Colonel FORESTER), reported HER MAJESTY'S Answer to the Address, as follows: I have received with much satisfaction not enter into any discussion either on the your loyal and dutiful Address. merits or demerits of thasure, reserving it for future con As regarded I rely with confidence on your careful amendment, consideration of the Measures which will idation and be submitted to you; and I shall at all you were con- times be ready to co-operate with you in o amendments improving and strengthening the Institutions of the Country, and in promoting gether; but when there the happiness and prosperity of all classes si- of My Subjects. PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. QUESTION. MR. T. DUNCOMBE: I wish to put ccess- a question to the right hon. the Chancellor in the of the Exchequer on the subject of the Act of Reform Bill. On the first evening of our n in the Bill meeting the right hon. Gentleman stated whilst on the that the Government were ready with their good deal as to new reform measure; but the right hon. considerable doubt. Gentleman also added (" Order!")-I am should be able volun- trying to make my question intelligible to nefit of the Bankrupt the House. scot-free, was a thing MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Gentleman must not enter into any argument in put- | reading before Easter. As Easter is ting a question. MR. T. DUNCOMBE: No, Sir, I am not doing so. I am only stating the reasons why I ask the question. The right. hon. Gentleman added that the Bill would not be brought in until other more important business of the country was disposed of. That has led to some misconception and some misunderstanding on the subject, and to considerable misgiving in the public mind as to when the Bill will be introduced. As I have no doubt all this can be removed, the question I have to ask the right hon. Gentleman is, whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government during the present month to introduce their Bill for the amendment of the representation of the people? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: The only question which was addressed to me the other night upon the subject was, whether the Government were prepared to bring in their Reform Bill immediately; to which I replied that it was not their intention to bring it in immediately, as there was other important and urgent business which required the attention of the House. I indicated at the same time some portion of that urgent business; and though it would be presumption to say how long that business would occupy the attention of Parliament, the natural inference from what I said when I referred to the Navy Estimates and to some Votes being taken in Committee of Supply to enable my right hon. Friend (Sir J. Pakington) to make his statement, and to bring forward the measures which he deems necessary, was that the delay would not be very considerable. There is also other business also of an urgent character, of which my noble Friend near me (Lord Stanley) has given notice. The House can probably form an opinion of how much time will be occupied in the discussion on In dian finance. The House is as good a judge as I am of the time which these measures will require for their fair discussion. When they are settled, it is my intention to give notice of a day when I shall have the honour of bringing forward a measure for amending the representation of the people. The hon. Gentleman will understand that it is not in my power to fix the day; but, taking a general view as to what will be the progress of business, not only is it our intention that it shall be brought in before Easter, but we contemplate taking the opinion of the House upon the second rather late this year, if the second reading meets that reception which we fondly anticipate, the House will have the opportunity even of making progress in Committee on the Bill before that time. MR. BRIGHT: Perhaps I may be allowed to ask another question. Permit me to say that what the public require is time to consider the Bill before it comes to a second reading. That is an essential thing. I would therefore recommend-(" Order!") Well, if I may not recommend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, I will ask him whether he will name a day now, or state when he will name a day, when the Bill will be introduced? Because I presume that not more than one night will be taken up in the introduction of the Bill. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I think I have clearly answered the questions that have been put to me. It is not in my power to name precisely the day when the Bill will be introduced; but I shall give fair notice, and shall take care that there is ample opportunity for consideration between the introduction and the second reading. ARMY CHAPLAINS (INDIA).—QUESTION. MR. KINNAIRD begged to ask the noble Lord the Secretary of State for India what permanent increase to the regular Bengal establishment of chaplains to the Protestant troops had been made during the last twelve months, and whether it was the intention of the Government to make any further permanent increase, in consequence of the probability of a much larger number of British troops than formerly being kept in India? LORD STANLEY said, that up to September, 1857, the permanent strength of the establishment of chaplains of the Church of England was-in Bengal 68, Madras 35, and Bombay 26; making 129 in all. Since that time they had been increased from 68 to 80 in Bengal, from 35 to 40 in Madras, and from 26 to 30 in Bombay; making 150 in all, or an increase of 21. The whole of that increase, except 6 of the chaplains added to the Bengal establishment, had taken place within the last twelve months. In addition, 10 supernumerary chaplains had now been sent out to meet the urgent wants of the troops, who were not placed at once on the permanent establishment, but would be absorbed into it as vacancies occurred. There had also been an increase of Presbyterian chaplains of without placing all insolvent estates under the ad- "The system of the bankrupt law with the alterations and further remedies, which we have humbly suggested to your Majesty, is well adapted to those purposes, but so long as debtors having no assets are liable to be imprisoned-and many thousands are imprisoned every year-it is practically impossible to administer such cases under a law requiring rigorous investigation of accounts, regular proof of debts, with audits, and other proceedings." partment, and from them had emanated a Report containing various recommendations as to alterations in the system as it stood, which they thought it desirable to have introduced. Of those recommendations, however, the greater number had been completely neglected. If he might venture to say so, he believed that this unwillingness to alter the Law of 1849 arose from the premature consolidation which it effected. The whole system was felt to be so entire and complete that men were afraid to touch any part of it lest the whole should come down. If the Legislature had proceeded in a more cautious manner -if they had introduced only such amendments as appeared to them to be necessary, and then, after allowing time to see their working, had brought them all into one consolidated Act, he thought they would have acted much more wisely; but Their Lordships would bear in mind that although the Legislature had been station- the Report from which he had just quoted ary in reference to the question, the mind had been issued prior to the passing of the of the public out of doors had been by no Protection Acts, so that the only mode of means inactive. Meeting after meeting to obtaining the benefit of the Insolvent Act take the subject into consideration had been was by the debtor's first going to prison. held throughout the country. Numerous But from the Report of the Commissioners petitions with regard to it had been pre- it appears they were of opinion that, in sented to that House. A central meeting order to accomplish the object which they of delegates from all the commercial towns had in view of uniting the Insolvent and had assembled in London, and the sugBankruptcy Courts, it would be necessary gestions which were made and the views to abolish, or, at all events, to modify in a which were propounded on those several very considerable degree, the law of inoccasions had enabled Her Majesty's Mi-prisonment for debt. They had accordnisters at last to form some idea of what was the nature of the requirements of the commercial community in connection with the question. Those requirements they had endeavoured to meet so far as they considered them to be just, reasonable, and at the same time practicable. Now, the first point which seemed to have engrossed the attention of those among the public who had directed their attention to the subject was the existence of two distinct and independent tribunals for the administration of insolvent estates, and there had been very strong recommendatious made as to the propriety of placing the two Courts-of Bankruptcy and of Insolvency-under the operation of one system. As early as 1840 the Commission to which he had already adverted had given expression to their opinion on the matter in their very able Report in the following terms:-They said "It appears to us that to unite the jurisdiction on matters of bankruptcy and insolvency would, upon principle, tend much to benefit the public; but this benefit cannot, we think, be obtained ingly addressed themselves to that point also, and stated, in words which were precisely the same as those which had been used by the Common Law Commissioners in 1832, in reference to arrests on mesne process, that "The principle of the present law is to do justice by the use of the strong and compulsory means of arrest and imprisonment, applied indiscriminately. The system has been found to be productive of so much hardship and injustice that it was at last deemed necessary to mitigate its consequences by the enactment of the insolvent law. The joint operation of the two opposite processes, for the imprisonment and enlargement of to tend to the suspicion which seems to be fully debtors, has been productive of so much evil as verified by inquiry, that the mischief ought to be obviated, not by provisions designed for the mere mitigation of its consequences, but by removing its cause; that is, by limiting the power of imit is warranted on the plain and just principle of prisonment itself, and confining it to cases where preventing the debtor from fraudulently absconding, or removing his property beyond the reach of justice, or for the punishment of actual fraud, or compelling the debtor after judgment either to pay the debt or to make a cession of his property for the benefit of his creditors. Beyond this, we believe that the practice of imprisonment for debt is neither warranted in principle nor beneficial in practice, and that, on the contrary, while the exercise of the present unlimited power and imprisonment is productive of pecuniary loss, injury, and distress to creditors as well as to debtors, it also occasions great moral evils in its tendency to subdue that proper degree of pride and honest feeling which is inconsistent with the degradation of imprisonment in a gaol, and to level the distinction between guilt and misfor tune." seen that the Insolvent Debtor's Court, being deprived of the greater part of its functions, no longer continued to be essential. He was bound, however, to say, that long as imprisonment for debt has existed, and that Court has been intrusted with the duty of discharging debtors who were entitled to their discharge, it was quite impossible that the law could have With the principles which were enunciated been better administered than it has been in that portion of the Report of the Com- by the present Commissioners. The Govern missioners he entirely concurred, and, act- ment measure proposed to establish one Court ing upon the suggestion there made, and only, which was to be called the Court of in order to clear the way for legislation, Insolvency; but in abolishing the Insoltheir Lordships would find that the Go- vent Court they proposed not to dispense vernment measure set out with various immediately with the Insolvent Commisclauses which were intended to restrain, sioners. It was thought that those gentlebut not wholly to abolish, imprisonment men might be called into active service, on final process. For these different pro- and might be usefully employed under the posals he was happy to think that he new system; and, in this way, not only had the sanction not only of the Com- would the advantage of their services and missioners upon these two occasions, but experience be secured, but the extent of also of many members of their Lordships' the permanent working staff which would be House. In 1844 the late Lord Cotten-requisite would be ascertained. One Court ham introduced a Bill for abolishing im-only being thus established for the purpose prisonment for debt, and upon that occa- of administering one uniform law of debtor sion his noble and learned Friend Lord and creditor, there then arose a question Lyndhurst adverted very strongly indeed of considerable interest and importanceto what he considered the absurdity of the namely, whether it was possible any longer existing division between the two Courts to keep up the distinction between the for administering the law of debtor and trader and the non-trader. Their Lordcreditor, and to the injustice also of that ships were probably aware that a great provision by which the after-acquired pro-demand had been made for the total aboperty of an insolvent debtor was made liable to his creditors. In addition to the authority of Lord Lyndhurst and of Lord Cottenham he had that of the late Lord Denman, and of two noble and learned Friends whom he now saw present, one of whom (Lord Brougham) last Session introduced a Bill for the very purpose of abolishing imprisonment for debt. Thus fortified, he would call their Lordships' attention to the clauses with which this measure set out, and by which imprisoment upon final process was restrained. In future it was only to be permitted-first, in cases where there was an apprehension of the debtor's absconding, which their Lordships were probably aware was provided for at present under the 1st and 2nd of Victoria, and also under the Absconding Debtor's Arrest Act of 1851; secondly, where the debt had been fraudulently incurred or there had been a vexatious defence; thirdly, where the debt was due in respect of damages which had been recovered in any action of tort. In all other cases no imprisonment for debt would be permitted. Having thus cleared the way, it would be lition of this distinction, and upon careful consideration the Government felt disposed to yield to that demand to a very considerable extent, though they thoughtand he apprehended that their Lordships would agree with him-that it would be impossible to do so entirely. For instance, with regard to acts of insolvency, some were peculiar to persons in business, and could hardly be applied to the case of nontraders. The Government proposed, therefore, that upon these three grounds alone should the non-trader either have the benefit of the Act or be exposed to its provisions:first, where he himself applied for the benefit of the Act, when his property might be distributed among his creditors; secondly, where he left the country for the purpose of defeating or delaying his creditors, or where being abroad, he remained there with the same object; and thirdly, where, a judgment having been obtained against him by a creditor, upon a summons issued he failed to satisfy that judgment, or to enter into some arrangement for that purpose. In these three cases only would the law be applicable to non-traders. |