The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-07 00:00:00

LAW PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR moved that an humble
address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his
Majesty would be graciously pleased to order to be laid on
their Lordships' table, it copy of the last report made by
the Common Law Commisioners of Inquiry. It was not
his intention at present to enter into any detailed exposi-
tion of the contents of that report, or into any discussion
of the merits of the iilterations and improvements in law
proceedings which it recommended. But he might state
that a more important document had seldom been printed,
or laid before Parliament. The Commissioners laid con-
docted the inquiries with the most exemplary industry and
impartiality, and with the most consummate intelligence,
and had collected a mass of evidence of the highest im-
portance in recard to the topics to which their attention
had been directed, and moreover, had given opinions upon
these topics, and the r feet of the evidence, which were
worthy of the most serious consideration of both Houses
of Parliament. He might mention one important topic to
which they fad paid particular attention, and as to which
they had collected a great deal of most valuable evidence—
he meant the process of law as between debtor
and creditor.* On this point, also, they hail given
their opinions, founded, as tli-ir opinions generally
were, upon true and solid principles of improvement,
and the majority were of opinion, that imprison-
ment for debt, both on meson process and in execution,
might be entirely abolished, except under very particular
• circumstances. That creditors should have every means
of getting payment of their debts from debtors who could
pay if they chose—that all means should be taken from
debtors of fraudulently defeating the just claims of their
creditors—that all those anomalies should he expunged
from the law by which unfair debtors were enabled to set
their creditors at defiance—that those rules of practice
should be abolished by which creditors were hampered in
their attempts to recover their debts, and by which fraudu-
lent and unfair debtors were enabled to escape from the
payment of their just debts—were principles founded on the
seendest and most solid reason ; and there was hope that
those inconsistencies in law proceedings which stood in the
way of these desirable results, might be gradually and
temperately, but eff ctually removed, if this report should
receive the sanction of this and the other House of Parlia-
ment. When he spoke of the ago ition of imprisonment
for debt on mesne process and after judgment, that must
of course he understood as coupled with the putting of
means into the hands of creditors for the recovery of their
deters, of which, by the law as it at present stood, they
were deprived, and of which they had for a very long time,
if not for nearly time out of mind, been deprived by the al-
teration of circumstances, with reference to common law
proceedings. The principle of the law, no doubt, originally
was, and must have been, that the whole of the property of a
debtor should be liable to the claims of the just and bona fide
creditor. It in ver could have been meant, that while what
was technically called the goods of a debtor should be liable
to the claims of the creditor, that more important part
of his property, which did not come under that technical
denomination, should be exempted. In the earliest state
of the (-amnion law, these goods and chattels were gene-
raely all the property that a man possessed, and to these
the common law process was confined. But in progress
of time circumstances were altered, and a most important
and large mass of property arose, founded on credit, and
this property the creditor found it impossible to attach by
the common law process. The great bulk of the property
of a debtor might consist of credits. He might have pro-
perty in the public funds, for instance, to a hundred
times a greater amount than the goods and chattels or
personal property in his possession, and yet there was no
provision in the common law by which the creditor could
directly attach that species of property. A man might
have the great bulk of his property in the funds, and there
it was exempt from the common law process. The great
bulk of a man's property might consist of debts due to
him ; but this property the creditor could not reach by
the common law process. Nay, the debtor might have
gold and silver on his table—the very gold and silver bor-
rowed from the creditor himself, and yet the creditor
could not touch the money, not even his own gold anti
silver, by the common law process; and the oracular rca-
-on of the law was that money did nut come under the
technical denomination of goods, and that it would be re.
moving landmarks and es-ential distinctions if money
could be taken even in a process in execu-
tion against goods. He mentioned this merely as
en instance of defect in the law which called loudly
for amendment, without at all meaning to go at length into
a discussion of the subject of the report. He mentioned
it to show that the adoption of the improvements
in this particular recommended in the report were not,
properly speaking, innovations or alterations in the prin-
ciple and foundation of the law, but only applications of
the original principle and reason of the law to the change
of circumstances—which had taken piece since the common
law process was first framed and e-tahlished. What was
proposed was to give its full effect to the principle of the
eommon law, by adapting its process to the new state
rl circumstances, by bringing within the reach of that pm-
eras the property founded on credit, which, when the
process was originally formed, had scarc,ly any existence.
The Commissioners had also investigated with great pains,
calmness, judiciousness, and ability, the subiTt of impri-
sonment for debt on mesne process, and the majority of
them were of opinion that imprisonment of the person on
mesne process might, under certain circumstances, be dis-
pensed with, as well as imprisonment in execution. But
this, of course, must be accompanied by putting increased
powers into the hands of the creditors to get at the effects
of the debtors ; and even imprisonment might still be
also
in a legal or moral sense—for
his s
retained, as a means of compelling a debtor to give up
as a punishment for fraud or
criminal
acts which should
dsthicaotnu,:,l
eithere
either legally criminal, or quasi
criminal, as being crimes in a moral point of view. It
e debtor fraudulently refuse to surrender his pro-
perty, he would have no just reason to complain that
he was imprisoned until he did surrender for the pay-
ment of his just debts, nor would he have any just reason
to complain if he should be imprisoned as a punishment
for having endeavoured to defeat his just creditor by fraud,
or any other act legally or morally criminal. People

'night, by an extravagant expenditure, ;• compared with
their incames, contract debts which they must themselves
he well assured they could not possibly pay, and this might
he considered as a fraud, anti might properly be punished
as such. Where a debtor refused td surrenderhis pro-
perty, or when he had fraudulently contracted debts, in
either case imp.isonment might still be retained—in the
One ease to compel payment, and in the other as a punish-
ment. This ,Ippeared to be a very sound doctrine, and one
which well deserved to be sanctioned by the Legislattire.
There wiis another instance in which imprisonment on
mesne process might be properly retained, and that was,
when there were reasonable grounds to apprehend an
es-
c!pc, and in one or two other cases with which he world
not then trouble the House. He had thus stared very
generally the nature and amount of this report on the
subject of law process as between debtor and creditor.
The Commissioners had collected a great m iss of most va-
loade evidence, on which a considerable difference of opi-
nions would be found, and it was his duty to state that,
as to the total abolition of imprisonment for debt
under the modifications which he had mentioned,
there was some difference of opinion among the
Commissioners themselves. But this only proved
the complete fairness and Unbiassed ititpartiali!y with
which the Commissioners had performed the taste which
they haul undertaken. The fact, however, AV AS as he had
stated it, and be considered the report, therefore, es to the
particulars in which the difference had existed, only as the
report of the nt ,jority. There was another topic to which
the Commissioners had also turned !heir attention—a topic
to which the attention of Parliament had been called by
himself and others at a firmer period—and that was, the
providing of a more cheap and expeditious process for the
recovery of debts under 501. or 601. In the improvements
recommended in this report, the majority of the Com-
missioners had already the concurrence of many in this and
the other house, and it was probable that its perusal would
gain over some who before differed with them, while those
who had before entertained similar opinions would have
these opinions confirmed. II 's Lordship concluded by put-
ting, his motion, which was agreed to oem. dins.
Adjourned till Ti ursday.