The Sun.
London, England, 1835-05-14 00:00:00

BILL.

Sir R. PEEL rose to present a petition, very numerously
signed by a most respectable body of persons, calling them-

selves merchants, traders, and others, of the city of West-
minster, against certain parts of a Bill which had been brought
in by the present Attorney- General, entitled a Bill for the
facilitating the Recovery of Debts, and abolishing Imprison-
ment for Debt in certain cases. He believed the Bill had been
referred to the consideration of a Select Committee, and that
Committee had not yet made their report. Under these circum-
stances, to enter into any discussion upon the Bill, or upon
its general principles, till that report was made, would be pre-
mature. Therefore, without saying a word that could pro-
mote any discussion upon the presentation of this petition, but
merely calling the attention of the House to the fact that the peti-
tion emanated from a body of practical men deeply interested in
the Bill, he would call their attention again to the allegations of
the petition, when it was printed, as containing the opinions
of those who were enabled to form an opinion well worthy
of the consideration of the House.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The
petitioners considered that the Bill would delay, rather
than facilitate the recovery of debts ; they stated that the
honest debtor, under the existing laws, had little diffi-
culty in obtaining all the relief to which he was justly en-
titled.
He considered that the Bill deprived the petitioners
of their main security ; and that the abolition of arrest and im-
prisonment for debt, without substituting some equivalent for
the recovery of book debts, would be ruinous to the peti-
tioners. Under these circumstances they prayed the House
not to give their assent to the Bill • and they prayed to be
heard by their agents, and to have their witnesses examined
before the Committee of the House. Without expressing any
opinion upon the Bill, he begged leave to present the petition.
Mr. CAR RITTHERS (as we understood) thought that the
Committee ought to call before them practical men, as it was
very important to have their evidence before making any
report. He had presented petitions opposing the Bill, entirely
because the Bill did not, in their opinion, afford any equiva-
lent to the trading community in taking away the coercion of
imprisonment.
Mr. C. PELHAM entered his protest against this Bill.
He understood from the Hon. Member who had just sat down
that the present Bill had been committed to a Committee up
stairs, but that no evidence had been given by those
parties in the country who were most aggrieved.—( Hear.)
The grievance was that persons were not to have justice done
at their own doors, but their rights were to be submitted to a
tribunal under the management and control of persons who
had not that knowledge of the subject which they ought to
have.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
that Hon. Members had fallen into some little mistake upon
the subject. The Committee, according to the usages of the
House, could not receive parole evidence.
Mr. HUME was sorry that the Attorney. General was not
present, as he might have removed many erroneous impressions
that the present subject had not undergone sufficient investi-
gation. He thought the House would best consult its own
interest and further this important measure, by allowing the
petitioners to be heard.
Mr. ROBINSON thought that no charge could be main-
tained against the members of the present Government
of not attending to the interests of the public in intro-
ducing the present measure.---( Hear, hear.) All that
the trading community asked was, that the House would, when
it was abbut to abolish that power, to which individually he
was friendly, give to them the power of recovering their debts.
While they wished this they had no disposition to continue
the practice of imprisonment for debt. At present the reco-
very of small debts was almost impossible, in consequence of
the intricacies of the law.
Sir F. POLLOCK was not disposed, in a matter of im-
portance like the present, to legislate without strict inquiry.
To the details of the present measure he had great objections,
but with its principle he was disposed fully to concur.
He had heard with great satisfaction that the bill was to be
farther considered, as he would be sorry to suppose that any
thing connected with the Report of that Committee should not
be open to general inquiry. From all he bad heard and seen,
and as far as his experience served him as a guide, he should
say that he would be sorry if the Bill did not undergo the
fullest discussion in that House. By this means the honest
debtors and creditors would be secured in obtaining that

justice to which they were entitled. He begged to apologize
for trespassing on the House, but as one of the Commissioners,
he wished to place his sentiments upon record, as regarded the
probable operation of this Bill.—( Hear, hear.)