The National Register.
London, England, 1809-03-05 00:00:00

111.VRCII 5.

TIIE NATIONAL REGISTER.

thus the original creditor received only a dividend upon a divi-
dend. This was evidently a great abuse, and he meant to pro-
pose, that the creditors should be authorised to appoint a bank,
in which the bankrupt's property may be deposited. The
creditors had this power already, but there was no penalty on
the assignees for non-compliance. By way of remedy
he meant to propose, that if the creditors did not at
their second meeting appoint such a place of deposit, then
it :hi) ;id he done ;my the commissioners; and that the
assignees should be charged 20 per cent. on the value of all time
efiects which they kept in their hands. lie also meant to pro-
pose enactments which ••could have the effect of lessening the
expellees attending commissions of bankruptcy : in particular,
that no actions at law should be brought against assignees fur
non-payment of dividends, which was a very fruitful source of ex-
pencobto the bankrupt's estate. He proposed that in such cases
there should be a summary remedy by petition to the Lord
Chancellor. An uncertificated bankrupt was placed in the
most deplorable situation. His industry was lug to himself,
and to the country, because he could never consider the fruits
of it as his own, and he was constantly liable to be impri-
soned during the remainder of his life, for debts contracted
previous to his bankruptcy. Before the Act of the 30m
Geo. 11. the granting of a certificate was left to the Chan,
cellar alone; but now by that Act it was left to the creditors,
and unless four-fifths of them in number and value consented to
his 'Teel vinga certificate, however fair and honourable the con-
duct of the bankrupt had been she was liable to remain 'facer
tificated for life. This was not the only hardship ; for he knew
if to be the fact, from his experience in the Court of Chancery,
that creditors sometimes kept away, the bankrupt did not receive
his certificate, and he immediately became liable to imprison-
ment by the creditor who kept aloof. This part of the subject
was connected with the policy of imprisonment for life on ac-
count of debt, and on it he would express his opinion, that it
would be doing the greatest benefit to society by abolishing
altogether such a system. If the bankrupt retained any property,
his life was forfeited ; and after all he was liable to be imprisoned
for not having what he thus could not possibly have. From his
experience he could say, certificates were seldom withheld from
dishonest bankrupts, hut often from those who had acted honestly.
The general object of withholding these certificates was to ex-
tort money, either from the bankrupts themselves, at after
periods, or from their relatives, and the father of the bankrupt,
from paternal sympathy, was ()Reim compelled to part with the
earnings of a life of iutiost ry to save his on from perpetual im-
prisonment. The number of uncertifieateil bankrupts aas very
great. In the year ISO) there were 940 ban!crupts, and of these
there werelSl without a certificate ; iu 1;406 there were WS
and of these 601 were uneertificated. Within the 1:14 20 years,
the whole number of bankrupts had been 16,202. and of these
0,597 were without certificates. In 1772, a temnoorary Act
was passed, similar to the Insolvency Act, by which time Lord
Chancellor was empowered to grant certificates in such bank-
rupts as he thought proper ; and in 1775, a similar Act was
passed. Was it reasonable that the fate of bankrupts should be
more in the power of their credttors now th;al was thought proper
then I Why should these acts have been only temporary What
he should propose was this : ifat the end of 2 years after the bank-
rupt's last examination his certificate should not he signed by
four-fifths of his creditors, then he might apply for it to the
Lord Chancellor, who should have power to grant the same,
unless the creditors assigned satisfactory grounds for the refusal.
He should propose also that this should have a retrospective in-
fluence, and that all those who were at present w ithout their cer-
tificates for two years should have liberty to appeal to the
Lord Chancellor. Here it might be asked, had he nothing to
propose for securing the punishment of dishonest bankrupts, the
numbers of whom had multiplied. He believed that one great
reason why the offence itself was multiplied, because it was made
a capital felony. It was now $0 years since the crime was made
capital, during which period tbere must have been very nume•
rous instances of fraudulent bankruptcy, aod yet '.19 all that
time there had been only three instances of conviction, its
two of which they had received a pardon. The truth was, that
men felt an extreme repugnance at putting the law in force, and
therefore, in most cases, the fraudulent bankrupt escaped alto-
gether. He did not wish to harry through time Bill which he
proposed to bring in. If such a' Bill had passed many
years ago, how much wealth would have been acquired to the
nation by the industry of individuals, who had now been left
to pine in absolute want and penury, and how many
ileartb that were now brukeu dowu with affliction ,would have