go free. If a bankrupt were to remain liable for a certain number of years in the event of his debts not being paid in full, such a liability would exercise a prejudicial effect on the trade of the country. The bankrupt would not then be put in a fair position, because it would be hardly possible for him to obtain credit for the purpose of carrying on any kind of business, and he (Mr. F. C. Smith) therefore hoped the provisions of the Bill which related to that subject would remain unaltered.

There it was considered advisable, he presumed, to encourage the idea that bribery was a crime, by appointing to hear election petitions, functionaries, part of whose previous duties it had been to preside at criminal trials. Besides, it was thought desirable to endeavour to avoid the suspicion of political bias in a matter so closely connected with politics, and therefore each of the principal courts of Common Law was required to select one of its own members to try election petitions. It was also truly stated that those Judges were in the MR. ANDERSON: As one of the habit of hearing and weighing vivá voce Scotch Members I might have left this evidence, and that such evidence would discussion entirely to the English Memform the principal material for the deci- bers, but inasmuch as the firm with sions on election petitions. But in the which I was connected often suffered present case, not only did none of these from the bad state of the English Bankreasons apply, but it was also true that ruptcy Law, I shall be much pleased to bankruptcy business was more analo- see the change which the present Bill gous to the business of a Court of Equity proposes. In my opinion that law is so than to that of the Courts of Common bad that almost any change must be an Law. Nor could it be doubted that at improvement. The hon. and learned the Chancery Bar were to be found gen- Gentleman the Attorney General has tlemen as intelligent and honourable as told us that his Bill is for the most part in the other branches of the great pro-founded on the Scotch Law, and I think fession of the law. On these grounds he thought it very objectionable to limit the discretion of the Advisers of the Crown in the way that was now proposed.

MR. ALDERMAN LUSK said, he hoped that the Attorney General would be firm and push the Bill through. We did want a change in the Law of Bankruptcy, for at present it was so monstrously bad that a measure must be a very poor one indeed which would not make it better. The present Bill was considered a great improvement on former Bills. This was the fourth Bill he had seen introduced, and he hoped it would not be talked out, and end in nothing. It was said that hard cases made bad law, and though there might arise an occasional hard case under the present Bill that was no reason for throwing doubts on the measure; it might prove the contrary. He found almost every one out-of-doors say that the Bill would be a great improvement, and therefore he hoped the hon. and learned Gentleman would not withdraw it.

MR. F. C. SMITH said, he wished to offer his cordial thanks to the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for his introduction of that excellent Bill. He hoped that it would soon become law. He thought if a bankrupt paid 10s. in the pound he ought to be let

I may congratulate him upon the fact that he has adopted from the Scotch system a great deal which is good, and he has even introduced some im

provements. I think that particularly the proposal by which parties are to be induced to make known the state of their affairs before they have run their estates down to the dregs is a very great improvement. I will only add one further observation, and it is in confirmation of a remark of the hon. Member for Bristol (Mr. Morley) as to the want of a public prosecutor in cases of fraud. Of course, it is desirable that fraudulent bankrupts should be punished, and you never can secure this object without first taking the step suggested, and appointing a public prosecutor. You never will get creditors to go to the expense and trouble of a prosecution unless you have some such officer appointed. Indeed I may go further, and say that it is somewhat surpris ing to a Scotchman that you in England should have so long submitted to the annoyance, the trouble, and the expense of having to be prosecutors whenever any man does you an injury of a criminal character. In Scotland we have long recognized the principle that when a man perpetrates a criminal act he does an injury not only to the person who is the principal sufferer, but to the public at

large, and consequently we have a public | leased on payment of a dividend of prosecutor to see that punishment is 6s. 8d.; in this measure the minimum awarded to the offender. The Lord Advocate is at the head of this procedure, and in every district there is a ProcuratorFiscal under him. I think that in anything you may adopt from the Scotch system you could not do better than adopt this also.

was fixed at 10s. 6d. If it were resolved to make a bankrupt's future property liable to the extent of 20s., as some hon. Member had proposed, before a release were granted, the law of bankruptcy might as well be abolished altogether. It was desirable that the bankrupt should have some inducement for stopping early, before the estate was completely dissipated by unsuccessful efforts to regain solvency; it was desirable to make it his interest to stop when he could pay a dividend and not to go on until nothing was left; and it was desirable also to give him a fair chance after being declared bankrupt. He would have five

10s. 6d. in the pound he would be released from his debts for ever; while if he did not pay that dividend his afteracquired property would be liable, but at the discretion of the Court. These requirements the Bill met, and he claimed the co-operation of his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Jessel) in Committee. With regard to the question of reputed ownership the foundation of the rule was sound, though no doubt it worked harshly in some cases, and it was certainly carried too far when extended to what was called choses in action-invisible property on which the bankrupt could not have obtained credit. But evidently the creditors had some claim upon pro

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, he had to express his satisfaction at the manner in which the Bill had been received. With one exception, every hon. Member who had spoken approved of the general principles of the Bill. Differences of opinion on particular points would, of course, arise in the consideration of such a vast number of provisions in so complicated a measure as a Bank-years to relieve himself, and if he paid ruptcy Bill, but he assured the hon. Member for Bristol (Mr. Morley), and those in whose behalf he spoke, that he would carefully consider any suggestions that might be made to him and adopt them as far as possible. Most of the topics which had been raised could more conveniently be discussed in Committee; he therefore proposed to deal with them lightly at present. The hon. and learned Member for Dover (Mr. Jessel), in his able speech upon the general Law of Bankruptcy, appeared to find but little fault with the leading features of the measure, but suggested that more powers should be given to creditors by arrangement clauses, and that they should be empowered to put an end to a bank-perty intrusted to a person who became ruptcy if they thought fit. The Bill, he believed, already gave this power, but, if it did not, the addition of a few words would readily supply the omission. The hon. and learned Member also expressed an opinion on the subject of after-acquired property and the extent to which it should be liable. Upon this point he assured the hon. and learned Member that the Bill went further in the direction of severity than any that had ever before been proposed. Hitherto a bankrupt had been allowed to obtain his discharge, as regarded his future property, without paying any dividend at all; indeed, in the majority of cases during last year and for some years previously, no dividend whatever had been paid, yet the bankrupts in these cases had obtained their discharge and their futureacquired property had been in no respect liable. The Committee of 1865 recommended that a bankrupt should be re

bankrupt after having obtained credit on the strength of his reputed ownership of that property. The rule, therefore, was not dealt with in the Bill, but some modification of the clause on the subject might be made; and he would not follow his hon. and learned Friend in his remarks upon the subject further. The hon. Member for East Sussex (Mr. Gregory) had objected to some of the provisions of the Bill with respect to the service of notices and some other matters; but it was proposed to intrust the Judge and the Lord Chancellor with a power of making rules and regulations for the guidance of the court in London, and of the different courts throughout the country. It was better to leave such matters of regulation to the discretion of a Judge in whom confidence could be placed, than to attempt to prescribe every rule of practice in an Act of Parliament. He relied on that provision in a great mea

sure for the working of the Bill. That | be possible to keep better or arrangement enabled them to make the officials and to exercise mo measure much shorter than it otherwise over them; there would be would have been, and thus it was that, cials in future, for it was p while the Bill of last year contained no make a clean sweep of severa less than 530 clauses, the present Bill con- necessary to have a Chief Jud tained only 130. The worthy Alderman, the purpose of trying impor the Member for the City of London (Mr. and hearing appeals; and he Alderman W. Lawrence) seemed to fear help thinking it was a proper there would not be power to reach frau- that the appeals should go to tha dulent, absconding, and embezzling trus- Court of Common Law, from tees; but such cases were met by the Chief Judge was taken. With Fraudulent Trustees Act. He believed the remarks of the hon. and lear it would be found there was ample pro- ber for Reading (Sir Francis vision for the examination of bankrupts; as to not giving the Chance and his answer to the suggestion that chance, it might be said that penal clauses should be introduced was was given to the Common Law I that they would be found in the Im- The appointment of an existi prisonment for Debt Bill-which he who had proved his capacity w should presently ask the House to read bably carry with it more weigh a second time-where it was thought by appointment of any gentleman the draftsman and himself better to be selected from either the Cha place them. There had been no omis- or the Common Law Bar. The sion, either in this respect or as regarded jects sought by the Bill were to the repeal of existing Acts, for it was the law, to abolish a vast a thought better to have a separate Repeal officialism which had encumb Bill and to bring it in when the Bill had operation of our bankruptcy sys passed through Committee and it had to cheapen the administration been seen what statutes had been re- rupt estates which, in many ca pealed. Only one more question re- cost 75 per cent in this country, quired any remark-namely, the ap- Scotland the average cost was pointment of a Chief Judge. To that than 12 or 13 per cent. Thes appointment he attached a good deal of pointed strongly to the exped importance. It was proposed by Lord adopting as far as possible th Westbury, in his Bill of 1861, and it was system; and they had the test approved by this House; but the House a Scotch Member (Mr. Anders of Lords rejected the proposal, and to the Bill not only embraced th that the author of the Bill attributed elements of that system, but was, almost entirely the failure of his mea- respects, an improvement upo sure, for the provision was material to They had endeavoured to go u the working of that Act. Lord Westbury principle of separating the judic likened the Judge in that case to the the administrative functions, lea mainspring of a watch; and although administration entirely to the c he (the Attorney General) was not pre- and giving the judicial functions pared to go quite that length, he re- to the Court. He was glad to garded the appointment of a Chief Judge general judgment which had be -a Judge of the highest authority-as a nounced upon the Bill by his h most important portion of the scheme. learned Friends, and by those Ger He looked upon it as the keystone of the who were entitled to speak in beha arch, for they must rely upon a Chief mercantile community, and he sh Judge to frame rules of practice for happy to receive any further sugg London and provincial courts, and to for the purpose of making it m introduce uniformity of procedure and ceptable to the public. of practice. Without disrespect to the Commissioners of Bankruptcy, it must be Bill read a second time, and con said there had been an utter absence of for Monday 19th of April. control over the officials of the courts, which had not existed in the superior courts; and it was hoped that by the appointment of a Chief Judge it would

The Attorney General

was then said that credit would be dis- the debtor had been guilty of fraud, or, turbed, and that traders would not be having the means, persistently refused able to carry on their business. But to pay; whereas debtors in bankruptcy those forebodings were purely imagi- of upwards of £50 would have to take nary, and in the same way he believed their trial before a jury in a criminal no evil would attend the good that must court. That was simply a difference in undoubtedly result from the abolition of procedure. He believed that imprisonfinal imprisonment. If, however, they ment in cases of fraudulent indebtedallowed the rich man to escape under ness was right, but that the man who the bankruptcy system they ought not to was merely unfortunate should not be permit the poor man to be liable to im- regarded or treated as a criminal. He prisonment; for, by so doing, they would trusted that the learned Gentleman certainly be open to the charge of having would proceed with the measure, though one law for the man in broadcloth and there were one or two points which he and another for the man in corduroys. should like to see altered. He would At present the County Courts were con- suggest that instead of referring, as in verted into agencies for the collection of Clause 4, to other statutes the Act should small debts, many of which were incurred be complete in itself. In Clause 10 by the wives of poor men in consequence there was a sub-section directed against of the importunities of traders. These the concealment of goods, and the onus debts were frequently left outstanding of proving innocence was laid upon the till the harvest season, when the creditors person charged. In the next sub-secinsisted upon payment or sent the debtors tion it was provided that if a man reto prison, and the men so imprisoned moved his goods from the premises he were committed again and again unless was presumed to be acting innocently they satisfied the harpies to whom they in so doing, and the onus of proving were indebted. In Whitecross Street him guilty lay upon those who charged Prison, he was told, the County Court him. Now, he could not see any good debtors were imprisoned in something like the cages for wild beasts at the Zoological Gardens, while persons imprisoned for large debts were provided with all the luxuries to which they had been accustomed. All political economists, from Adam Smith to Mill, laid down that it was not for the interest of a State to encourage credit, and he believed that if they were to-morrow to abolish imprisonment for debt trade would be all the more flourishing, and men would be less tempted to embark in those specculations where their gains were their own and their losses their creditors'. He contended that unless a fraud or a crime were committed it was not the province of society to interfere, and if this interference were to cease both the trade and the morals of the country would benefit thereby. He trusted, therefore, that the measure would be proceeded with.

MR. CANDLISH said, he did not agree with the hon. Member for Hull (Mr. Norwood) that the Bill made one law for the poor man coming before the County Court with a debt under £50, and another for the man whose liabilities were greater. The principle in both cases was the same; the procedure only was different. The Bill gave power to the County Court Judge to imprison if

reason for this distinction. He could not see why in the case of concealment guilt should be presumed, while in the case of removal the presumption was to be in favour of the party's innocence. This measure, in connection with the Bill for amending the law of bankruptcy, was, however, a great improvement upon the present Bankruptcy Laws, and he thought the thanks of the whole commercial community were due to the Attorney General for having introduced this and the Bankruptcy Bill.

MR. SERJEANT SIMON said, that, while anxious to assist the Attorney General in carrying out the principle on which this Bill was founded, he thought that Section 6 was open to very serious objection, and not calculated to give satisfaction to any portion of the community. He had never been an advocate for imprisoning men merely because they had the misfortune of not being able to pay their debts. He would not imprison a man merely because he had been unfortunate; but, at the same time, he thought that there ought to be some protection for persons who, in the course of business, were obliged to give trust, and who without such protection might find themselves defrauded. Section 6 of this Act preserved to the