The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-17 00:00:00

:THE SUN, :LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JITLY 17 1860

has been made upon China, which ought to result in a fur
ther payment from her resources and in aid of ours. (A
laugh.) lam not surprised that that statement should be
received by the committee in a manner to show that they
are not sanguine as to the general principle ; and I confess
that if they were any great middleman who would under-
take to deal with us upon those terms—that we should
make over to him entirely and bodily the whole of the com-
pensation that we expected, both retrospective and prospec-
tive, from China, and that he, on his part, in consideration
of that, should undertake whatever future charge may arise
on account of the war, over and above what has be stated
to the house and is known to the Government--I en
think that
financially we might perhaps do very well to close with
such an offer. But, at any rate, a portion of the sums are
actually due by the treaty of Tien-twin, and they constitute
an element in the case that ought not to beput out of view.
The sum which we propose to raise by taxes, out of the
/12,336,000 that is required, will amount to about one mil-
lion of money ; and the mode in which we propose to raise
it is, by an immediate addition to the duty upon ardent
spirits. (Hear, hear.) I will not enter fully into all the con-
siderations applicable to that duty, but I will state at once
that the amount of addition we contemplate is an addition
of ls. 11d. per gallon on the various descriptions of ardent
spirits which are chargeable either under excise or under
customs; and that the effect of the measure will be to leave
British spirits liable to a duty of 10s. a gallon, colonial
spirits to a duty of 10s. 2d., and foreign spirits, generally
speaking, to a duty of 103. sd. per gallon. Those duties
will be particularly enumerated in the resolutions which it
will be my business to place in the hands of the chairman.
In proposing to the committee this augmentation of the
duty upon spirits, her Majesty's Government set out from
what they conceive to le the recognised and established, as
well as the sound and healthy principle of taxation in regard
to that particular commodity. That principle they conceive
and understand to be this, that it is a commodity out of the
consumption of which you ought to levy the maximum of ob-
tainable revenue. (Hear, hear.) It differs from other com-
modities in this : when you deal, for example, with the arti-
cle of tea or sugar, your object is to promote the consump-
tion as much as possible consistently with obtaining the re-
venue you want—(hear, hear)—but when you approach the
article of spirits, that rule is precisely inverted, and your
object rather is to limit the consumption of the article as
far as possible, but always subject to the same condition,
which I will by-and-bye consider—namely, consistently
with obtaining the money you want. For it is a mistake
to suppose that by the mere increase of duty you can con-
tinue ad libitum to increase the proceeds. The question is
—how much can you get, what duty will the article bear
without diminishing the proceeds of the duty either by
adulteration or illicit distillation. That is a question neces-
sarily
and under all the circumstances one of doubt, and
more or less of difficulty; yet, still it is one that does not
altogether deny the calculations of the prudent and experi-
enced persons who have charge of these great branches of
the public revenue. The real question is, then, can we get
the money ? Upon that subject, it would be unfair, con-
sidering the difficulty of the case, to say that even the most
experienced or the most able public officers can give an
opinion upon which any absolute reliance can be placed.
But taking a calm and impartial view of the present state
of the trades connected with the production and sale of
spirits, and endeavouring to draw a fair inference from the
important experience of the last seven years, the conclusion
at which the Government arrived, borne out and sustained
in that conclusion by the assistance of their proper advisers,
is that there is no reason why the committee should not
now proceed to that which has long been looked upon as the
natural term and close of our legislation in regard to the duty
upon spirits, and at once tax it at the rate of 10s. a gallon.
That is not the highest duty that has been at any time im-
y osed. So late as 1823 a duty of between lls. and 12s. was
charged upon spirits in England. That duty was too high,
and smuggling was increased. It was then reduced to 7s.
It was then increased to Bs., and at that duty it has stood
for 40 years. Public opinion has become more adverse to
illicit distillation; since that the efficiency of the revenue
department is greater than it then was. What has taken
place in Ireland is full of instruction on this paint, even
more so than what took place in Scotland. In 1842 an ad-
dition of only ls. per gallon was made on Irish spirits;
but that addition was found to stimulate smug-
gling to such an extent that it was found necessary to re-
peal the act in 1843. But when a similar experiment was
repeated in 1853 not only was it not attended by a similar
failure, but it was followed by a further increase in 1854,
and a further one in 1855. Subsequent augmentations took
place, till at last the duty was equalised with that of Great
Britain. Thus in the short space of five years, between
1853 and 1858, the duty was carried from 2s. Bd. per gallon
to Bs. per gallon without giving any stimulus to illicit dis-
tillation. When we speak on this subject, Ireland is
naturally looked upon as the peccant part of the empire,
and attention is directed to that quarter. The case of Ire-
land with regard to illicit distillation is this :—The system
of distillation has improved ; more capital, more skill, and
more machinery have been applied to it. The views of
those who produce spirits are much more directed to extend
the trade in spirits as a great article of merchandise than
to local and partial supply. But above all, this important
point is to be taken into consideration, in addition to the
great change which has taken place in the social condition
of Ireland, and the general demand for labour—that the
duty of securing collection of the revenue has been trans-
ferred for the last five of six years to that most efficient
body, the Irish constabulary, who, with the greatest intel •
ligence, the greatest fidelity, and a strength tenfold that
of the revenue police, have conducted this important
business in the most satisfactory and effective man-
ner. (Hear, hear.) These are the considerations which have
induced the Government to believe that there is nothing
as respects illicit distillation in any one of the three coun-
tries which should prevent them from carrying the duty to
the point I have named. But loss may arise from adulte-
ration or dilution. Dilution is, I believe, normal in the
spirit trade. (Laughter.) In ordinary public-houses and
spirit shops it is not, I believe, too much to say that there
is hardly such a thing as the sale of spirit perfectly pure as
they get it from the distillery. (" Hear, hear," and laugh-
ter.) Even if that were an exaggerated statement, which
any gentleman may feel himself bound on the part of any
one of his constituents to resent—(laughter)---there is not
the slightest question that dilution has a tendency to in-
crease as the duty is increased—(hear)—and for that I have
made a just and fair deduction. But the clearest argument
which I can use to show that what we propose is .practi-
cable, and will produce the result anticipated, is by show-
ing that for the last three years, that is, both before the
equalisation of the Irish duty and ever since, the further
increase of duty has been confidently anticipated by the
trade. The mode of showing this is by the increase in the
deliveries that has preceded in those years the financial
statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the day.
We have had considerable deliveries of tea and sugar, when
these duties were increased, and we find that a simitar re-
sult has taken place with regard to spirits. • In 1858 the
right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) made his fin-
ancial statement on the 19th of April, and between the Ist
and 19th of April there was an increased delivery of spirits
from bond, which yielded, as compared with the correspond-
ing period of the former year—an excess of duty of no less
than £250,000. The spirit duty is so high that this excess of
delivery itself constituted a considerable charge, and there-
fore it was not a measure to which the persons engaged in the
business would resort unless there was a serious probability
that the Government and Parliament would put on a higher
duty. The case of 1858 was an Irish case. But in 1859
there was no such element. The duties in the :three coun-
tries were equal, and it was confidently believed by those
who were interested that when equalization had been
established increased duty would necessarily be the next step.
The financial statement was made on the 18th of July, and
between the Ist and the 16th there was an excess of delivery
of spirits from bond, as compared with the corresponding
period of the previous year, which yielded an augmentation
of revenue to an extent of not less than £287,000. But the
financial experience of the present year furnishes a still more
pregnant illustration. The financial statement of 1860 was
made on the 10th of February, and during the three weeks
ending the 10th of February there was an augmentation of
delivery of spirits from bond, which yielded an increase of
• revenue as compared with the corresponding period of the
former year, to the extent of £554,000. This constitutes the
solid foundation of the measure which we praises 3. At the
same time when we have estimated that the measure will
yield an increase of £1,000,000 in the year, I must remind
the committee that there are some special causes of uncer-
tainty—special to the article, and not connected with the
general topics to which I have just referred—by which it is
affected. First of all, it is only in the present y ear that fo-
reign spirits have been admitted into real competition with
spirits of British origin, and at so early a date after the
change we cannot yet say that they have found their equili-
brium in the market. Again, there is the competition with
wine. No doubt that will stand upon a different footing
hereafter from any upon which it has stood in former years,
and, lastly, there is the competition of that article, in which
so many gentlemen, especially on the opposite slue of the
house, take so lively and tender an interest—malt liquor.
whenever an increased duty has been placed upon spirits,
it a been found to stimulate the proceeds of the malt
uutY• In Scotland, and more particularly in Ireland,
them _
s been a considerable augmentation in the con-
sum ilation. of b
than 't beer, which is traceable to no other cause
s greater cheapness than spirits in consequence
of recent lep;isiac,
ties on the face t3fn. These, however, are rather uncertain-
ties case than in the substance, because
you gat on ono the account what you lose on the
other. If the committee
t the proposition of the Go-
vernment it will be necessary ad"
to introduce a small modifica-
tion of the Wine Duty Act, so
.as to guard against the frau-
dulent introduction of spirits :181tai,mpettoeftwhiinsed.
111,1 will
l
new state to the committee wit'anttvi:
duce The increase of ls. 11d. which.
pro • we propose on
tish spirits may be taken, at a fair and rooder
te estimate,
if we made no allowance for diminution of consumption,
amountptien, at
£2,250,000. That is without taking
into view h
derivable from the increase on foreign and colonial spirits.
But we must allow for some diminution of consumption in
consequence of the increase of duty, which will have the
effect of adding perhaps something like 20 per cent, or
nearly so to the price. Instead, therefore, of assuming
an
augmentation of £2,250,000, I shall only assume an aug-
mentation of £1,000,000 from the increase of thee e excise
duty on British spirit, which is making an allowan of 10
or 11 per cent, for diminished consumption. £1,000,000

would be the yield of this increase if we were dealing
with the whole financial year, but I must remind the com-
mittee that I am speaking on the 16th July, when three-
and-a-half months of the financial year have passed away,
to which we must add about six weeks more, because the
practice of the revenue department is to charge the revenue
in one six weeks, and to raise it in the next. Looking to
what will come into the Exchequer before the Ist of next
April, in consequence of this measure, and assuming that
for the whole year it will be £1,000,000, I only take credit
for £650,000. To this, however, we must make an important
addition from the compensating duty on foreign and colo-
nial spirits, which lestimate at £400,000, making altogether
£1,050,000. This, then, is the addition to the taxes of the
country which we propose to meet the expenses of the war
with China, but which we propose to be permanent in its
character, because we believe it to be sound and salutary in
itself, which it has been expected parliament would adopt,
and with regard to which the only difference for some years
past has been as to the precise moment when it could be
adopted consistently with safety and prudence. Of the
£2,336,000 which was not provided for, I have now provided
by the increase of the spirit duties for £1,050,000, leaving a
sum of £1,286,000 still to be provided for. That sum we
propose to provide for without any further increase to the
taxation of the country. (Hear, hear.) The balances in the
Exchequer aro in so satisfactory a state that they will admit
of the withdrawal of that, or even, if necessary, a greater sum.
(Hear, hear.) The surplus so wisely provided ferby thehouse
is of course available under the provisions of thelaw, in addi-
tion:to the balance of the present year. The proper course is
to apply any part of this balance when the taxation of the year
is insufficient,rather than to go through the operose and need-
less double process, first of all of applying a snm of money in
extinction of the debt, and then going into the market to
I contract a new debt. The state of the balances is as fol-
lows :—On the first of April the balances in the Exchequer,
which, as the committee should be aware, by no means
represented the whole of the public deposits in the Bank,
but only those on the consolidated fund, were £7,972,000.
On the 30th of June they were reduced to £6,594,000. But
that sum did not represent a real reduction. It was due to
the fact that the collection of the income tax is by no means
equable in the four quarters of the financial year, for it
comes in very lightly in the first and third, but heavily in
the second and fourth quarters, and as we are now coming
into one of the heavy quarters, I anticipate that the balances
on the 30th of September will be better than they were on
the 30th of June. Looking therefore to the demands on ac-
count of the public service, and the drain for the Chinese
war, and to the supplies in the treasury chest, I feel no
hesitation in stating to the committee that it will not be
necessary to take any special measures beyond what I have
indicated to meet this expenditure, as the proceeds of the
last year's revenue will enable us to defray it without diffi-
culty or inconvenience. If necessary the demand upon the
balances could be carried to a sum of about £2,000,000. It
will be requisite to apply to Parliament before the close of
the session for power to re-borrow in some form or other
£1,000,000, now outstanding in exchequer bonds which will
fall due in November next, but no inconvenience can attend
that transaction. If circumstances are favourable we may
not find it necessary to re-borrow the whole of that sum,
but if even we should be obliged to do so we can easily con-
duct the operation with the Commissioners for the Reduc-
tion of the National Debt. Of course it will be necessary
for me on this, as on former occasions, to ask the house for
a vote. The purport of that vote is well understood. It
does not in any way bind the discretion of the committee or
the house, but it secures the charge of duty on the com-
modity, so that the revenue may suffer no loss. On the
present occasion we must do with regard to the
customs what we do with regard to the excise,
because if we were to impose an excise duty of 10s.
now, and were not to impose a similar duty on foreign and
colonial spirits till next week, for the week after there
would be an immense delivery of foreign and colonial sririts.
The further resolutions to be afterwards proposed stand in
a different category, and have long been under the conside-
ration of the house. But on the present proposal, in con-
formity with the usual practice, I ask for an immediate
vote. Of course, this is without binding the discretion of the
house, and the Government will appoint a convenient day
for the discussion of the details of the measure. But there
is another subject connected with the expenditure and
charge on the country which has not yet been brought be-
fore Parliament—l mean the vote for fortifications—(hear,
hear)—which has remained up to the present time without
explanation, and with regard to which, of course, the house
will be desirous to know the intentions of the Government.
What I have to say on that subject is, that though it could
not be conveniently combined with the very difficult and
heterogeneous matter I have now been dealing with, yet it
is the intention of her Majesty's Government, and of my
noble friend at the head of her Majesty's Government,
that he should explain the ' mode in which he proposes
to apply that sum of money which has been reserved
for the vote for fortifications, and likewise the intentions
they entertain with respect to the report of the
commissioners that has recently been published,
upon :an evening which he will select, antecedently
to the day when the house will be asked to give a decisive
vote on the proposals now submitted to them. All I need
now say is, that, so far as the intentions of the Government
are concerned, if the house shall accede to the proposals we
have made, it is not our intention to make any further de-
mand on the taxation of the country for the services of the
present year. (Cheers.) I have only to thank the house
for the manner in which they have heard me.
Mr. VANCE said that as he represented a city in which
the manufacture of spirits was more extensively carried on
than in any other in the United Kingdom, he would admit
that there ought to be no limit to the taxation on ardent
spirits, until it reached an amount which would defeat its
own object, but he believed that an addition of is. lid. a
gallon on Irish spirits would effect that, for there would be
an enormous increase of the illicit manufacture, and the
consumption of duty-paid spirits weed fall far short of what
the Chancellor of the Exchequer anticipated. A few years
ago the duty on Irish spirits was only 2s. Bd. a gallon, and
it had been gradually augmented, till now it was to be 10s. a
gallon. This was a favourable time for doing justice to the
home trade in spirits. If they had been placed in bond, the
duty was levied on the number of gallons which the casks
contained originally when it entered the Queen's stores,
whilst foreign spirits, when taken out of bond, were only
charged on the actual amount the casks contained at the
time of taking them out. The allowances for leakage and
evaporation of home-made spirits were much smaller than
the actual amount of waste.
Mr. CRAWFORD said it would be convenient if the
right hon. gentleman Would state what alterations of the
new wine duties would be necessary, in consequence of the
increase in the spirit duties he now proposed.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked whether it was the in-
tention of the Government to make any advance on the vote
for fortifications in the present year ? Perhaps the noble
lord would explain that matter, with respect to which
opinion out of doors was very much embarrassed. Was it
intended to spend more money than the ordinary vote for
fortifications this year ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was afraid
he had not expressed himself quite clearly about the fortifi-
cation vote. 'What he meant to say was this—that his noble
friend would himself, before the house or the committee
were called upon to give a decisive vote, at a further stage
of these proceedings, with regard to the provision for the
expedition to China, explain both the disposal which the
Government proposed to make of the sum that had been re-
ceived in a lump as a vote for fortifications, and likewise the
course which they proposed to take, and the proposals they
would submit, in consequence of the report presented by
the Fortification Commissioners. To that he had appended
this further statement, that it was not their intention to
make any further demand on the people of this country for
taxes during the present year. (Cheers and laughter.) That
was the position in which he thought it best for him to
leave the matter at present. His hon. friend behind him had
asked what addition it would be necessary to make to the
wine duties if they adopted the 10s. spirit duty. There
would be no change whatever in the wine duties at the pre-
sent moment ; the 3s. duty now leviable would remain
without change until the Ist of January, because that was
a duty which caused no apprehension of the spirit duty
being impaired by it. But he thought it probable that to
some limited extent an augmentation might afterwards be
proposed, perhaps as follows :—ln the ls. duty, on wine of
less than 18 per cent proof strength, there would be no
change. In the ls. Gd. duty, on wine above 18 per cent.
proof strength, and under 25 per cent., the Government
would be obliged to propose an additional 2d. or 3d. per gal.
In the 2s. duty, on wine between 25 and 40 per cent. proof
strength, there might be an addition of either 4d. or sd.per
gal. This was the proposal which probably would be made.
The matter to which the hon. member for Dublin (Mr. Vance)
had referred was one of the importance of which the Govern-
ment were quite aware, and they had under consideration at
this moment various points connected with the more just
and equitable adjustment of the excise regulations in favour
of the distillers, which was the natural consequence of their
being subject for the first time to a real foreign competition.
He was sure the Government would be desirous to deal with
the matter in an equitable and even liberal spirit.
Mr. M. SMITH did not understand the right hon. gen-
tleman's statement about the balances in the Exchequer,
when there were deficiency bills to the amount of £1,500,000
issued in the month of July.
• Sir C. NAPIER said the right hon. gentleman had told
the house that he would raise no more money this year by
way of taxation. Ho wished to ask how the money for the
fortifications was to be got, and whether it was to be by loan.
In answer to Mr. WILLIAMS,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said in
further explanation that foreign spirits would remain ex-
actly in the same relative position as they now were. The
duty on colonial spirits would stand at 10s. 2d. a gallon,
the duty on foreign at 10s. sd. The hon. gentleman behind
(Mr. Smith) had been misled by what appeared on the face
of the quarterly return. No doubt the sum of £1,500,000
of deficiency bills would nominally be issued, in conformity
with the Act of Parliament ; but so far as he could judge
he believed that no amount would really be borrowed on
deficiency bills, and no interest would have to be paid on
them for the present quarter. The gallant admiral had asked
him whether the sum for fortifications would be provided
for by a loan, so that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
was invited to tell the secret of his noble friend, and to spoil
all the
interest of the debate which was to arise on that

question. But he ahould not commit such en error as to
anticipate that statement. (Oh, and laughter.)
Sir S. NORTHCOTE asked from what period the draw-
back would be allowed, and whether it was from the 31st
of March last ?
Mr. T. BARING hoped the noble lord (Palmerston)
would not keep his secret too long, if he proposed a loan for
the fortifications, as it would be very prejudicial to business
in the City to prolong any uncertainty about it.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was glad
that a question had been put as to the drawback. The fact
was that in estimating, on the 10th February last, the pro-
bable charge on the country for what remained of the finan-
cial year, he took £350,000 on account of wine drawback,
but that sum was provided for out of the revenue of last
year, and formed no charge on the revenue of the present
year. ,That sum was not, however, actually obtained out of
the revenue of last year before the expiration of the year,
because the Government had not obtained Parliamentary
authority to pay the drawback, and it could not be done
until the present quarter. Almost all the payments had now
been made, though a limited number were still, outstand-
ing. The whole charge on the public in respect of draw-
back, as the cost of effecting this great operation of the re-
duction of the duties, would be under £200,000, instead of
£350,00D, which had been expected.
Lord FERMOY thought the distillers were a body of
men not quite justly dealt with. He also regretted that
the right hon. gentleman availed himself so quietly of the
paper duty granted to him by the other house of Parlia-
ment. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman was not behaving
fairly towards those who maintained that the question of
the breach of privilege of the House of Commons had not
yet been settled, and who contended that the bill for the
repeal of the paper duty ought to be sent back to the House
of Lords. The amount of the paper duty should have been
allowed to remain as a surplus until the House of Commons
had expressed a positive opinion on the question.
Mr. E. BALL observed with, regret that the right hon.
gentleman adhered to the design of abridging the period
allowed to raaltsters for payment of their duty, and that he
reckoned upon £700,000 from that source.
The CHANCELLOR of theEXCHEQUEßrepliedthat
the question of the malt credit remained now exactly where
it was in February. The maltsters would rather derive a
benefit from an augmentation of the spirit duties than suffer
from it, and so their position was not worse, but somewhat
better. In answer to the noble lord (Fermoy)he would say that
he had endeavoured in his statement just now to do his duty
and to prejudice nobody—tc; prejudice no- opinion. As a
member of that house, whenever the question at issue;with
the House of Lords should come on for debate, he (Mr.
Gladstone) would be quite ready to enter into it, and speak
his own opinion without disguise. But it was not for him,
on every incidental occasion, to be bearding a branch of the
legislature for which he entertained a sincere respect, or to
be continually referring to his own individual opinion. He
had been careful to say that theie would be this money
available, if it should be the pleasure of the house to retain
the paper duty, and in that matter his conscience was free.
(Hear, hear.) 1
Mr. GRIFFITH observed that it was a mere figure of
speechfor the right hon. gentleman to say that he allowed
any latitude as to the course to be taken with the paper
duty, and his proposals now did in fact extinguish the ques-
tion upon which he talked with so much ardour and elo-
quence the other night.
Mr. HORSMAN asked whether the house would hear
that night, from the noble lord the Prime Minister, when
the subject of the fortifications was to be brought on?
Would it be on Thursday next ?
Lord PALMERSTON replied that he could not at pre-
sent state when it would be, but he would take an early
opportunity of doing se.
The resolutions were then agreed to.
EXCISE LICENSES FOR WINES AND SPIRITS.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
following resolution :—" That, towards raising the supply
granted to her Majesty, the 12th section of the act passed
in the sixth year of the reign of King George IV., chap. 81,
which enacts that it shall not be necessary for any person
or persons to take out an excise license for the sale of any
foreign goods or commodities, for the sale of which in any
manner an excise license is required, whilst such goods or
commodities shall be and remain in the warehouse or ware-
houses in which the same shall have been deposited, lodged,
or secured according to law before payment of duty upon
the importation thereof, shall not extend to exempt any
person from liability to take out an excise license for the
sale of any foreign wine or spirits."
Mr. HANBURY said he hoped the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would not press this resolution, because it really
was not understood. Merchants were not in the habit of
importing wines and spirits which went into the Custom-
house, and had nothing at all to do with the excise, and it
was not necessary for them to take out an excise license.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said this
proposition was necessary in the view of those who had
given their attention to this subject. Up to the present
day there had been but a slight competition between the
ordinary established Ville and spirit merchants of England
and a class of persons who went about the country as agents
to foreign houses, and dealt in wines and spirits which were
in bond, or who were agents for British houses perhaps, but
who always dealt in articles in bond. Now that they were
about probably to have a sharp competition in these articles,
it was absolutely necessary to remove that anomaly and re-
quire that every one who dealt in an article in bond should
be liable to pay the same excise duty as those who dealt in
the same articles not in bond. He now came to the ques-
tion of the West India importers of rum, and he considered
they were favoured to the extent of a penny a gallon, nay,
he was not sure that they were not favoured to the extent
of three-pence—(laughter)—and he advised them not to
move in the matter.
The resolution was then agreed to.
MALT CREDIT.

The following resolution was then agreed to :—" That
towards raising the supply granted to her Majesty, the time
limited for payment of the duty of excise on malt by every
maltster or maker of malt who shall have given security in
the manner directed by the act passed in that behalf, in re-
spect of all malt begun to be made on or after the first day
of October, 1860, shall be six weeks in lieu of twelve weeks
after the making of such account or return of duty as in the
said act is mentioned."

fall in the value of the stock. The clause, however, gave a
guarantee to the creditors that the Government would be
responsible for any such loss—a principle which he thought
highly objectionable.
Mr. CAYLEY characterised the proposition to saddlethe
public with the less arising from an investment made for the
advantage of the creditors as altogether monstrous, and said
he was disposed to take the sense of the committee upon the
clause.
Mr. VANCE contended that when the general bank-
ruptcy fund got the benefit of the interest, as he believed it
did, the creditors ought in justice to be protected from any
fall in the price of stock.
Mr. BARROW opposed the clause.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the clause was word
for word the same as the existing law on the subject, which
had been in operation for some years. The real facts were
these :—The accountant in bankruptcy had always a large
floating balance to his credit, and the portion of it which he
found it necessary to invest yielded an annual income of
about £40,000. That sum of £40,000 was applied for the
benefit of the Court of Bankruptcy, and was one of the
chief sources of revenue which enabled him to abolish the
onerous fees and impositions which were new charged to
suitors. He therefore contended that as the profit was taken
by the public, and applied to public purposes, the public
was bound to guarantee the parties entitled to the money
from all possibility of any deficiency. There was no likeli-
hood, however, that the Government would be called upon
to sustain any loss in consequence of the guarantee.
Mr. BOUVERIE thought the hon. and learned gentle-
man was wrong in supposing that the whole of the profits
of the investment were applied for the benefit of the public.
The creditors were the parties onlyinterested in their appli-
cation. The Attorney. General had treated the matter as if
it were a question of the administration of justice between
man and man ; it was a mere question of distribution of
bankrupts' estates among the creditors, and the proper
parties to pay the expenses of that operation were the cre-
ditors themselves.
Mr. LONGFIELD maintained that the Court of Bank-
ruptcy was for the administration of justice, in the highest
sense of the word.
The clause was supported by Mr. MURRAY and Mr
MALINS.
The committee then divided on the clause, and the num.
bers were :
For the clause
Against
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 133 and 134 were agreed to.
Upon clause 135, which regulates the amount of compere
sation to retiring commissioners,
Mr. PAGET moved an amendment substituting for the
" full amount" of salary for retiring allowances to the com-
missioners, " two-thirds" of the amount.
Mr. BAZLEY seconded the amendment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the rule inva-
riably adopted hitherto by the House of Commons was that
if an official position was taken away from an officer on
public grounds, he was entitled to the full amount of his
salary. Not to dwell upon considerations arising from the
sacred rights of property, the committee would be guilty of
great inconsistency if they adopted this amendment. He
earnestly hoped that the committee would not introduce a
new rule on this subject, which would be dangerous and
disastrous in its results.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS said that the principle laid down
by the hon. and learned gentleman was quite new. He de-
nied that there was any contract between the public and
these gentlemen. It seemed as though lawyers were to be
placed under a different rule than other men. He remem-
bered the abolition of the six clerks. He proposed on that
occasion that the retiring allowance of those gentlemen
should be £7OO a-year, but they were allowed to take away
with them £6,000 or £7,000a-year from the public treasury.
Mr. BOUVERIE said he thought the hon. and learned
Attorney-General put the illustration a little too high
when he compared these gentlemen's salaries to private
property. (Hear.) But with regard to the justice of the
case these five commissioners had served the country for
some 28 years, they were still capable of giving their ser-
vices to the public, and they had a right to suppose that
whilst they were competent to act, they would receive their
full salaries. Besides, as a matter of expediency, he thought
the interests of the public service would be best consulted
by treating gentlemen in the position of these commis-
sioners with liberality.
The committee then divided—
For the amendment 43
Against it
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 136,
Mr. HENLEY wished to know what was the sum in
gross that would become a permanent charge on the conso-
lidated fund under this clause.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he believed the
sum paid over for the use of the Insolvent Debtors Court
under Act of Parliament was about £4,500 a-year. It was
not intended to enlarge that obligation, but as the Insolvent
Debtors Court was to be absorbed in the new Court of
Bankruptcy, the object in this clause was merely to direct
i the sum of money now payable out of the consolidated fund
to the Insolvent Court should be paid over for the benefit
of the amalgamated jurisdiction.
After a short discussion,
Mr. HENLEY suggested the postponement of the clause
until all the other monetary matters of the bill were settled.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL agreed to postpone the
objectionable part of the clause, and embody it in a new
clause to be brought up at a future day.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 137, which provides that the Chief Judge of tie
new court shall have a retiring allowance of two• thirds of
his salary after fifteen years service, was also agreed to.
On clause 138, giving allowances to retiring officers,
Mr. BOUVERIE proposed to insert the words, " after
twelve years' service."
After a conversation,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL consented to the limit
of seven years' service; and the clause as amended was
agreed to.
Clause 139 was agreed to.
Clause 140 was postponed.
Clauses 141 to 149 were agreed to.
Upon clause 150, which provides that the sittings of the
Chief Court, and the London District Court should be held
at Basinghall-street,
Sir F. KELLY, referring to clause 31, in connexion
with this clause, asked whether it was intendef to change
the localities where at present the County Court judges
held their courts.
Mr. MALINS hoped that it was not intended the chief
judge should sit at Basinghall-street, for many of the abuses
of the present system arose from the court being held there
away from all the other courts of law. (Hear.) If the
court were transferred from Basinghell-street to Lincoln's-
inn or Westminster, it would be a great advantage in it-
self.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL would prefer that the
chief judge should sit at Westminster until the great
scheme which he hoped would be considered in the next
session of Parliament should hi carried out, whereby proper
buildings for all the courts would be erected upon the plot of
ground north of the Strand and Temple-bar. Probably the
.London District Court could be held at Basinghall-street.
In answer to the hon. and learned member for Suffolk (Sir
F. Kelly), he could say that there was no intention to
change the localities where County Courts were now held.
Mr. JAMES thought the Attorney-General could never
have visited Basinghall-street, or he never would have
thought of recommending that any judge should sit there.
A more unworthy place for the administration of justice
could not be imagined.
Mr. VANCE agreed that Basinghall-street was an unfit
place, but hoped that if any other place was intended to be
selected it would be mentioned in the bill, otherwise there
was no security that any change would be made.
The clause was agreed to, and also clause 151.
Upon clause 152, which abolishes the distinction between
traders and non-traders,
Mr. HENLEY moved an amendment for the purpose of
raising the important question whether this great change
should or should not take place. He would state to the
committee two or three classes of persons who would be in-
juriously affected by it. It was most unjust by retrospec-
tive action to place some persons in a position of advantage
and others in a position of amazing disadvantage, which
was never contemplated when the parties contracted. A
man's father might have died 20 or 30 years ago, leaving
an estate chargeable with various amounts, and that man,
as was commonly the practice, might have raised money
by mortgage on the property to pay off his brothers and
sisters. It was a debt, because the man covenanted with
the mortgagee to repay the money, as well as pledging the
land for it ; but it was a debt totally different in its nature
from liabilities to his butcher and baker, because the credi-
tor had a special security in the land for payreont. There
were cycles, as in 1847 and 1857, when money was hardly
to be obtained at all, and, if obtained, only at a most extra-
vagant rate of interest. A person in the situation which
he had described might be called upon in such times of
pressure to pay off his debt. If he did not it was proposed
that judgment might be recovered, and he might be made
a bankrupt. He might be told that it was the ordi-
nary case of a man against whom ajndgment was recovered,
but the t crew in ordinary cases could not be compared with
the screw of threatening to make such a person a bankrupt,
to send him to prison, to seize everything belonging to him,
even his most private papers, and to drag his wife into a
court, which they had just heard was unfit for any one to
enter. That was one class of persons, and a numerous one.
A vast portion of the land of England was mortgaged under
those circumstances, and it did not apply exclusively to men
of high rank and station. He believed that the more they
descended the scale the more was the land mortgaged, and
just in proportion as they descended the scale was the diffi-
culty of raising money in times of pressure increased—espe-
cially as the usury laws were repealed. It must not be sup-
posed that it was a question which only affected the higher
classes. It affected every man—from the Archbishop 0?
Canterbury to the lowest cottager, and such a change ought
not to be made without great and corresponding advan-
tages. He saw no objection to their being one court
instead of two. If a man wanted to petition the court let
him be made a bankrupt and to go the Bankruptcy Court,
but he saw no reason why they should include under the
operation of the bankrupt law a class of persons who could
not fairly be said to be debtors, Another class of cases was

not unfrequent. A man had a limited estate. Ho could not
raise money by mortgage. He had perhaps improvidently
been spending more than his income. He had to incur debts
to put his family out in the world, purchasing commissions
or educating them for professions. These debts were usually

met by borrowing money on annuities. When the eldest
son was 24 or 25 years of age an arrangement was often

made by which the entail was broken, money was raised on
mortgage, the annuities were discharged, and the family was
again placed in easy and comfortable circumstances. How
would the bill affect persons in that condition ? It said

that any conveyance for that purpose should be valid if
the lender had no notice of any act of bankruptcy.

These notices, of course, would make lenders of money very
careful. It would not be an easy matter sometimes to say
whether a lender had received that species of information
which the law described as a "notice." The definition of
"notice" often gave rise to litigation, and therefore he be-
lieved lenders of money would be very shy of dealing with
persons under the circumstances he had described, who
might be more or less deeply involved, and might, perhaps,
have judgments against them. Then, there was a third
class of cases, also of not unfrequent occurrence. He meant
cases where persons, being in difficulties, assigned their affairs
to trustees, very often for the purpose of raising money by
mortgage to pay off other incumbrances. Sometimes a father
and son joined in putting an estate under trust in that way,
and their affairs were thus set right without further trouble.
This bill, however, would interfere with an arrangement of
that kind, because it provided that every trust deed which
did not fulfil the conditions specified in the arrangement
clause should be utterly vcid. The case he had ins+ anced
was not provided for by the bill, and the consequence wculd
be that these arrangements would be rendered impossible.
Men circumstanced as he had described would, therefore, be
almost ruined. For these reasons he held that the clause,
naked as it stood, ought not to be agreed to. He hoped the
Attorney-General would either agree to exclude the large
class of persons he had specified from the operation of the
measure, or, if not, at least to introduce such provisions
as would prevent that great inconvenience which the bill, as
it stood, must necessarily cause to that class. He could not
see that by the proposed arrangement the smallest advant-
age would be conferred on any one except the moneylenders,
who, he believed, were perfectly capable of taking care of
themselves. (A laugh.) He understood almost all the hon,
and learned gentlemen in the house were against him on 1
this occasion. (Hear, hear, and no.) He was glad
there was some one to say no, but he feared that, generally,
the lawyers were against him. He believed, however, that
mankind at large had little reason to feel satisfied when all
the lawyers were on one side. When they were divided they
fought the matter out, and so the truth was elicited ; but
when there was a great preponderance of them on one side,
it was high time for laymen to look out. (A laugh.) It was
very desirable, no doubt, that the law should be made
as symmetrical as possible ; but he could not forget that
there had been great lawyers in the world before the pre-
sent generation, and that for some 200 years they had
drawn a great distinction between trading and other debtors.
He was well aware that this distinction had been much
broken down in the present century by the introduction of
the Insolvency Court system; but he thought it ought not
to demolished altogether, as the bill proposed. In moving
the omission of certain words, he did so, not under the pre-
tence that that would be the best way of altering the
clauses, but for the sake of raising discussion on the ques-
tion involved. He then moved the omission of the words
"debtors whether" after the word "all."
Mr. JAMES thought theright hon. gentlemanhad hardly
done justice to the lawyers--(a laugh)—for during the de-
bate on this bill they had taken a most liberal and generous
course, a number of them having voted against the enor-
mous compensation proposed to be awarded. (Hear, hear.)
This clause involved one of the most important questions
connected with the subject of bankruptcy, as affecting not
merely the mercantile but the social relations of the coun-
try. When the Attorney-General introduced the bill he
(Mr. James) stated that he would support the principle it
embodied, and he intended to do so. He must admit, how -
ever, that if it was to be carried out, it ought to be sur-
rounded with a great many protections. He found that by
clause 164 every judgment creditor who was entitled to sue
out against a debtor a writ of eapias ad satisfaciendum—
which could be got for a debt of £2o—or to charge the
debtor in execution, was authorised, at the end of one week
from the signing of judgment, to sue out against the debtor,
whether he be in custody or not, so long as he was in Eng-
land a summons, requiring him to appear and be examined
respecting his ability to satisfy the debt. Then again clause
170 provided as follows :
" Upon the appearance of the debtor he may be exa-
mined on oath, by or on behalf of the creditor and by the
court, respecting his ability to satisfy the debt, and for the
discovery of property applicable in that behalf, and shall be
bound to produce, on oath or otherwise, such books, papers
and documents in his possession or power, relating to pro-
perty applicable or alleged to be applicable to the satisfac-
tion of the debt, as the Court shall think fit, and to sign his
examination, when .reduced into writing; and any debtor,
who shall upon examination wilfully fail to discover fully
and truly to the best of his knowledge and belief all his pro-
perty, real and personal, inclusive of his rights and credits,
and to produce all books, papers, and documents in his pos-
session or power relating thereto, shall be liable to be com-
. raided by the Court as in tho case of a bankrupt."
It appeared to him that that was a very dangerous and ex-
traordinary power to confer on a creditor, and he could not
help thinking that there ought to be some distinction be-
tween a mercantile and, as the phrase was, a gentleman
debtor. (Hear.) By the French code no one except the per-
son trading was liable to the bankrupt law. But the present
clause might be made the means of the greatest extortion.
A young man who had contracted a debt of £4O or £5O
might get into the hands of usurers, who might make the
whole of his property subservient to their extortion. He
had given notice of an amendment, which he should press,
to the effect that all peers, whether Peers of Parliament or
otherwise, should be equally liable to the bankrupt laws
with members of the House of Commons.
Sir H. CAIRNS believed that this was the first occasion
on which a question had been brought before the House of
Commons which had excited much discussion out of doors
—namely, whether non-traders ought to be liable to the
bankrupt laws. He regretted that a discussion of so much
importance should come on at so advanced a period of the
session. It was to be remembered that, whatever the views
of hon. members might be as to the abolition of the distinc-
tion between traders and non-traders, such a change was not
demanded by commercial circles. The questi ,n that into-
' rested them was, whether they should have those amendments
in the administration and execution of the bankrupt laws
which they had demanded. The other question was not one
of urgency, and might have been postponed to another time.
It ought not at all events to be legislated upon without a
full and searching investigation. Having had occasion to
consider the subject, he would frankly state his belief that,
to a certain extent, an irresistible argument might be urged
in favour of abolishing the present distinction between
the trader and non-trader. When, however, he saw the
sweeping manner in which the change was proposed to be
made he felt the greatest alarm. If the clause were adopted,
all non-traders would be brought under the peril of com-
mitting one of the acts of bankruptcy therein described. Let
the committee observe what these acts of bankruptcy were,
the commission of anyone of which would make a non-trader
a bankrupt. By the 155th clause seven acts of bankruptcy
might be committed by a debtor. One was :—" If any debtor
shall, with intent to defeat or delay his creditors, depart
this realm." Who was to judge of the motive for which a
non-trader departed the realm ? 'Acre was an all-impor-
tant difference herein between a person carrying on busi-
ness and one who was not. The duty of a trader was to be
always at his post. If hd quitted the country, it was his
duty to make suitable arrangements and to leave no
engagements which his representatives could not satisfy.
The burden of proving that he did not go abroad to defraud
his creditors was therefore thrown upon the trader. But a
non-trader was not bound to be in the country. Hehad no
place of business at which he was Bound to be present.
Another act of bankruptcy was defined to be, if the debtor
"being out of this realm shall remain abroad." That was a
most astonishing act of bankruptcy to apply to a person
who was not in trade. Another act of bankruptcy was,
"If any debtor shall suffer himself to be arrested or taken
in execution for any debt not due, or shall suffer himself to
be outlawed, or procure his goods, money, or chattels to be
attached, sequestered, or taken in execution, or make or
cause to be made, either within this realm or elsewhere, any
fraudulent grant or conveyance of any of his lands, tenements,
goods or chattels, or make or cause to be made any fraudu-
lent surrender of any of his copyhold lands or tenements, or
make or cause to be made any fraudulent gift, delivery, or
transfer of any of his goods and chattels, any such debtor
doing, suffering, procuring, executing, permitting, making,
or causing to be made, with such intent any of the acts,
deeds, or matters aforesaid, shall be deemed to have thereby
committed an act of bankruptcy."
By clause 158 it was enacted that
" If any debtor, having been arrested or committed to
prison for debt, or on any attachment for nonpayment of
money, shall, upon such or any other arrest or commitment
for debt or nonpayment of money. or upon any detention
for debt, lie in prison for 14 days, or, having been arrested
for any cause, shall lie in prison for 14 days after any de-
tainer for debt lodged against him, and not discharged, every
such debtor shall thereby be deemed to have committed an
act of bankruptcy; or if any such debtor, having been ar-
rested, committed, or detained for debt, shall escape out
of prison or custody, every such debtor shall be deemed to
have thereby committed an act of bankruptcy from the time
of such arrest, commitment, or detention."
He had read these provisions to show how wholly inap-
plicable they were to the state of the law that had grown
up in regard t: the trade of the country. The law gave the
trader certain advantages, but stipulated that in return he
must regulate his conduct so as not to elude his engage-
ments as a commercial man. But these acts of bankruptcy
that were framed and originated for traders became inap-
plicable to those who were not men of business, and had no
business habits. At all events, it was nothing more than'
justice, if they were going to make an alteration in the law
that they should only apply it to debts contracted hereafter.
Another safeguard ought to be inserted in the bill. The Le-
gislature might very safely permit all nen-traders to be
made bankrupts on their own petition. The law at present
was that if a creditor were in a position to take any debtor
in execution, having recovered judgment against him, the
debtor might be put in prison either until he paid or until
he volunteered himself to come under the Insolvent Act.
It always seemed to him that when the creditor had got to
the point when he might put the debtor in prison, the law
might advantageously dispense with the formality of
putting him in prison, and might enable the cre-
ditor to summon him before the Court of Bankruptcy,
and make him subject to the operation of the

_ -
to those cases in which a creditor was in a position to put

his debtor in prison, or to cases in which the debtor volun-
tarily submitted to it, he would deem it his duty to vote
for the amendment of the right hon. member for Oxford-

shire. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. SMITH said the clause made an absolute identity
between those who were traders and those who were non-

traders, and thus would effect a complete revolution in the
law of bankruptcy in this country. There had at all times
been a distinction between these two classes in this country,
and there was good ground for that distinction, for a man

engaged in trade and commerce was bound at all times to
meet his engagements, and to be ever at hand both with his
person and property ; but a man not engaged in tradewaa not
expected to have his estate in a condition to be turned into
money to be in a place of business ready to meet his creditor,
or when he went abroad to run the hazard of being adjudged
a bankrupt. (Hear.) The vice of the bill seemed to be that
it had many clauses exceedingly proper as applied to traders,
but harsh and oppressive to an excessive degree when applied
to those not engaged in trade. (Hear.) Any man might be
summoned before a Bankrupt Commissioner or county court
judge for a debt of £4O, and unless he could satisfy the
judge that he could pay not only that debt but any other he
might owe, he was to be declared a bankrupt. (Hear, hear )
He doubted whether in any code, however severe, such a
clause had ever been found. (Hear.) A man might be on the
moors in Scotland, or fishing salmon in Ireland, and be sum-
monad to appear before the Court in London within four
days, to be examined on oath as to his debts. It might be
right that a man engaged in commerce should be able at
once to pay everybody, but it was not necessary that every
man not in trade, from the Archbishop downwards, should
be compelled to appear at four days' notice, and pay all his
debts, or be declared a bankrupt. (Hear, hear.) There were
persons who had their incomes payable only at stated
periods, who had no property, and to whom credit was
given on the faith that they would pay when their salary
was received. But if a malicious creditor summoned such a
person before the court, and it came out that he could not
at the time pay his debts, he would become a lsrankrupt.
(Hear.) A farmer, as they all knew, looked to his crops to
pay his debts ; but, supposing he was summoned three or
four months before harvest for a debt, the result might be
that his crops would pass into other hands, and he would be
ruined. (Hear, hear.) He might refer to the case of officers
of the army, also, whose pay came in periodically, and who,
when moving about from place to place with their regi-
ments, would be liable to be summoned for small debts.
Were they t 3 be declared bankrupts because at the time
when they were summoned they were unable to pay all
their debts ? (Hear.) The distinction between traders and
non-traders was not arbitrary, but was founded on common
sense and the habits of mankind. It might be all right and
proper to frame stringent laws for traders, but that was no
reason why those who were non-traders should be drawn
into the net with them. He believed the parentage of this
bill lay not with the Attorney. General, but with the mer •
cantile community. Those who were beyond the pale of
trade had not been consulted regarding it, and he believed
that they were utterly ignorant of the consequences that
would follow from the 'adoption of the bill as it stood.
(Hear, hear.) If .a clear distinction was not made between
traders and non-traders the bill, he believed, would be pro-
ductive of mischiefs that its framers had never contem-
plated. (Hear, hear.)
Sir F. KELLY was anxious that this b 11 should pass,
and he agreed with the Attorney General in supporting the
principle of this clause, yet he could not help expressingthe
wish that his hon. and learned friend had stated to the
house thenature of the protection and safeguards with which
he meant to accompany it It might relieve some of his
friends from the apprehensions which, not unnaturally,
they entertained regarding this clause if they remembered
that by the law of Scotland, as amended some years ago,
the distinction between traders and non-traders had been
wholly abolished, and he was not aware that any serious
mischief, or any mischief at all, had arisen from its opera-
tion. (Hear, hear.) He must say that, much as he
desired to see this bill pass, he would rather see
it withdrawn than not have a distinct assurance from the
Attorney-General that some strong safeguards would ac-
company the clause now under consideration. It was im-
possible not to perceive that almost all the clauses which
immediately followed this, for the most part excellent in
themselves as regards traders, were altogether inapplicable
to a number of other classes in the community whose case
seemed to have been entirely forgotten. A trader was bound
to be at all times ready to pay his debts—it was of the very
essence of the solvency of a trader that he should, at any
and every moment, be prepared with any sum of money to
meet every demand that might lawfully be brought against
him ; but would they apply the clauses constituting acts of
bankruptcy, for instance, to landed proprietors?. He was
sorry to say that nine-tenths, or perhaps nineteen-
twentieths of the landed proprietors of the country had
their property more or less subject to mortgage. A
mortgage debt, though due in point of law, was not in-
tended to be claimed, and ran on year after year; but to
apply to such a case the provisions of this Act would. be to
introduce a revolution in the whole state of property, and
the condition in which every man in the kingdom who hap-
pened to be a landed proprietor would be placed. A gentle.
man possessed of an income from landed property of some
£2,000 a-year might have some debts, though, on the whole,
in easy circumstances; there might be a mortgage debt;
some ill-natured creditor might issue a summons against
him, and unless he was able to satisfy the mortgage debt in
four days he was liable to be declared a bankrupt by
the judge in bankruptcy. He could not agree to such a
clause unless the Attorney-General at once consented to
render inapplicable to non-traders in general the whole
series of provisions respecting acts of bankruptcy ; and, as
an additional safeguard, he would suggest that as to .
circumstances in which' a non-trader should be made
a bankrupt, he should be summoned, not within a
given time; .for that should in all cases depend on the dis-
cretion of the judge, but only on fair and ample notice
given. The debtor should then appear, according to the cir-
cumstances of the case, to give such information• respecting
his affairs as might seem reasonable to the judge ; and if it
should appear—but only if it should appear—that he was
utterly unable to pay his debts, that he was living on his
creditors, and that it was necessary the bankrupt law should
be put in operation against him—in these circumstances
only should he be made a bankrupt, and thus prevented
from wasting the estate. It was necessary to introduce into
the bill the most careful and specific provisions with regard
to the notice to all non-traders. A trader was bound to be
always in presence to meet his creditors ; but non-traders
might be absent on the continent for a year or two without
their address being known even to their own families, and
those cases could not be dealt with unles- satisfactory evi-
dence was given that the absent debtor had proper notice.
Before going further with this bill the committee had a
right t o expect from his hon. and learned friend the Attor-
ney-General a clear and specific explanation of the safe-
guards he meant to provide in the case of non-traders.
Mr. MALINS thought the queition raised by this clause
was of the least degree of importance. It was one of the
most valuable provisions of the bill, providing for the assi-
milation of the law of debtor and creditor to all classes of
the community. He thought it right that every facility
should be given for the recovery of debts, and
.that there
should be one uniform system by which those who were un-
able to pay their debts should have their case adjudicatel.
He agreed, however, that many qualifica ions should be
made with reference to non-traders. They should not be
liable to be made bankrupts in the manner provided by
the bill ; but only after judgment was obtained. The
great principle which it was desirable to establish was
that those who did not pay their debts should be made
with the greatest facility to do so, or at least to make a
cessio bonorum to their creditors, and that then, whether
traders or non-traders, they should be restored to the
capacity of acquiring property. Did the committee think
that non-traders who were in debt should be allowed to
obtain possession of their property by simply crossing the
Channel ? The reckless habits of extravagance now too
prevalent in the upper and middle classes of society would
be checked when it was found that debt could not be in-
curred with impunity. It was said that traders were bound
to be always ready to meet the claims of their creditors;
but ought not non-traders to be equally so bound ? By
going to Boulogne a debtor could avoid his creditors, or at
least put such obstacles in their way as amounted to an
avoidance of them ; but this bill would compel him either to
give up all the property for their benefit, or to come home
and deal with them as he must do if he were a trader. No
doubt proper safeguards ought to be provided, so as to pre-
vent an oppressive creditor from making even a trader
bankrupt ; and the principle of the clause deserved the
approval of the 'committee.
Mr. CAYLEY said the important question before them
ought not to be disposed of summarily, and he therefore
begged to move that the chairman report progress.
Mr. WHALLEY rose to address the committee, but was
prevented from proceeding by the cries of "Divide."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL hoped the motion for
reporting progress would not be pressed. The house was
then as full as he could expect to have it during the dis-
cuseien of the bill, and it would be convenient to dispose of
the question raised by this clause. (Hear, hear.)
Sir W.
coniFFE said the important question had not
yet been fsidered. Officers of the army and navy,
r W
serving their country abroad, would be placed in a most
serious position by this bill.
The seats under the gallery were cleared for a division,
but none took place, and the motion for reporting progress
was agreed to.
The house having resumed,
Lord PALMERSTON proposed that the bill should be
proceeded with on Thursday morning, but that this clause