The Press.
London, England, 1858-01-30 00:00:00

BANKRUPTCY REFORMS.

TN the year 1849, just after the passing of the
Bankrupt Law Amendment Act, Mr. W.
HAWKS, the Chairman of the Bankrupt Law
Amendment Act Society, announced to the
"commercial and trading classes" that the
reformed courts would " afford the quickest,
" cheapest, and most efficient means of wind-
" ing up estates." After eight years' expe-
rience, the commercial and trading classes
seem to have formed a different opinion.
Creditors still always prefer private arrange-
ments. But amid the numerous charges

which are preferred against these courts with
more or less of justice, that which was stated
by the influential meeting recently held at
Exeter to be the head and front of their offend-
ing is unquestionably the true cause of their
unpopularity. They are not the cheapest means
of winding up estates. In a private arrange-
ment the creditors are at no trouble and no
expense. A meeting is summoned—an ac-
countant reads a statement of the debtor's
position—the debtor makes his creditors an
offer—it is accepted—the meeting dissolves,
and all is over. But wherever there is a
legal inquiry there must be expense ; there
must be a highly-paid official assignee, and a
costly staff of officers. There will arise con-
flicting interests, tedious and expensive con-
tests, lawyers and lawyers bills. So far,
perhaps, the evil is to some extent beyond
the reach of cure. But his unquestionably true
that the Courts! of Bankruptcy are at present
far more costly than they need or ought to be.
It should never be forgotten that the costs in
bankruptcy must ultimately be paid by the
creditors—men who are already heavy losers,
and are called on to relinquish a portion of
their just claims. But in addition to this, in-
asmuch as the costs of the winding-up are
defrayed out of the estate in the first place,
business in bankruptcy is absolutely without
risk, and i 9 always paid for on the nail. The
best test of the truth of this is the avidity
with which the post of solicitor to the assignees
is pursued. In no oourts should the scale of
costs be watched so jealously and paid on so
low a scale; in no courts is the scale so high
and the scrutiny so lax.
What, however, at first surprised us was
that so sensible a body of men as the Exeter
meeting should have imagined that this evil
could not be remedied without the interference
of the Legislature. The Chancellor, assisted
by the Lords Justices and two of the Commis-
sioners, has, of course, full power to regulate
and from time to time alter the scale of costa
and fees payable in bankruptcy. It seemed

ainai w INMAN 1n lus aggression. I and fees payable in Danicruptcy. OUtnaivaa

that the mercantile public had only to apply
the requisite pressure to that great official,
and speedy success was certain. But a
moment's consideration convinced us that the
meeting was in the right. The movements of
the Houses of Parliament are of necessity
somewhat cumbrous, but they are expedition
itself compared with those of Lord CRAW-
WORTH._ _

Another, although secondary, cause of the
unpopularity of these courts is the dislike of
creditors who are traders to let the amount of
their loss be known, from a dread lest their
credit should be injured by it. And it has
been proposed, in consequence, to abolish the
necessity of proving debts in open court. But
the other creditors cannot be denied the right
of scrutinising every debt which will diminish
the bankrupt's estate, the common fund from
which the dividend of each of them is to
come—in short, of looking after their own
interests. And it is sufficiently obvious that
what must necessarily be open to all the
officers of the court and the whole body of
creditors can never effectually be made a
secret. Indeed, it is notorious that oven in
the case of private arrangements the names of
the principal creditors of the insolvent trader
and the amount of their losses can not be
concealed from anyone who really desires to
discover them. Still, the proposed remedy
might have some operation even in this direc-
tion; it might at least palliate what it could
not prevent, and would at all events be pro-
ductive of benefits of another kind. Men of
business do not like to appear in person in an
open court ; they are, as they love to put it,
no orators; they dislike, because they are
unused to, the formality of legal proceedings.
Hence they commonly appear by attorney,
and this becomes no inconsiderable addition
to the expenses they incur. Whatever makes
these courts more accessible to people who
have an undisputed debt to prove, is an
obstacle to their popularity removed.
In order, however. to relieve creditors from the
necessity of proving their debts in open court,
the action of the Legislature must be invoked.
The question of reform of the Bankrupt Law
once opened, other points will certainly be
mooted of no trifling gravity. Why should
there be separate tribunals for insolvents who
are and who are not traders ? Is the rule
that a debtor who gives up all his property is
entitled to his certificate, unless misconduct
be proved against him, a just rule? Is not a
trader who is unable to meet his engagements,
primd facie a wrong-doer, and is it not for him
to demonstrate the propriety of his dealings?
These and other questiens must be raised, and
we confess that we entertain grave doubts
whether the discussion of many of them has
yet reached that stage when their authorita
tive settlement by Parliament becomes de-
sirable.
Nor is the public without just cause of
complaint as to the mode in which such very
important appointments as those of the Com-
missioners in Bankruptcy are frequently filled.
There are exceptions. Mr. Commissioner
HOLROYD is eminently one. But even of the
London Commissioner. some are hardly equal
even in their professional attainments to the
grave duties which they have to discharge.
As to the country Commissioners, it is only ne-
cessary to read their names in ceder to learn
to what influences they owe their advance-
ment. Against some of them even darker
scandals have attained a too unhappy noto-
riety. We will not dwell on a painful subject.
It is enough to say here that a judge ocho is to
mete out justice to an embarrassed debtor
should not be one who is protected only by his
personal privileges from a debtor's prison.
But we do not hesitate to assert that, if the
constitution of the tribunals and the mode of
dealing with lebtors were made abso'utely
perfect to-morrow, the courts would still, if
they remained more costly, remain also less
popular than private arrangements. It is not
because judges are inefficient, or the law
faulty, that the public refuses such justice as
it can obtain. When horse-stealing ceased to
be capital, many a man thought death not too
severe a punishment ; but no one ever de-
clined to prosecute the thief because he would
be transported, and not hanged. Many a
tradesman thinks the recorder of his borough