The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-06 00:00:00

COURT OF CHANCERY ABOLITION OF
OFFICES BILL.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL mowed the third
reading of this Bill ; and after a few words from Mr.
JIUME and Mr, HAWES, the Bill was read a third time
and passed._

BANKRUPTCY LAW AMENDMENT BILL.

On the motion for the re-committal of this Bill,

Mr. M, PHILIPS said that he objected to the prin-
ciple of the Bill, but more especially to that part of it
which provided for the appointment of official assignees
in the country. Official assignees had not been found
altogether faultless in their connection with the Lon-
don Bankruptcy. Court, and he did think it would be
very unadvisable to allow the estates of bankrupts in
the country to pass through their hands. These assig-
nees were to be paid by a commission of 21 per cent.
upon the money passing through their hands. He did
not think it fair to pay 21 per cent. to those assignees
merely for paying away the money they had in their
hands. He objected, to the salaries to be paid to the
Commissioners, as being too large. He thought that
1,8001. a year was much too large a sum for the duties
those Commissioners had to discharge. Then the Bill
proposed that ten Commissioners be appointed. That
was top small a number. He did not think that thirty
would be able to perform the duties they would be called
on to discharge. In Manchester alone, from the Ist of
January, 1841, to the Ist of January, 1842, there were
725 meetings of bankrupts. He entertained so strong
an objection to the Bill, that he intended to move that
the Bill be read this day three months, that it might have
the full discussion such an important measure deserved.
He did not know that it would be competent to him to
adopt such a course, but he wished to manifest the de-
cided objection he entertained to the Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that there was no
such thing as a payment of 2f per cent. to the assignees
out of the dividends. The matter was left in the hands
of the Commissioners. Under the existing system the
expenses, which amounted to about 30,0001., were paid
out of the different estates, and would be saved by the
present Bill.

- Mr. WILLIAMS said there was much good in the
present Bill, but there were some objectionable points
also. Those who were most interested in the Bill were
desirous of its being postponed. But if it were perse-
vered with, he would not vote against going on with it.
Mr. POSTER admitted that the present law required
amendment, but he thonght that, in justice to those who
were most interested, it ought to be postponed.
Mr. BERNAL complained of the Bill coming before
the House from the House of Lords at so late a period.
Ile would put it to the Right Hon. Baronet whether
those who were it terested in the Bill would be dealt
fairly w ith if it was proceeded with at such a late period
of the sessional 'year ? He agreed with what had fallen
from the Hon. Member for Manchester; but hoping that
the Bill would not be persevered with, he would not en-
ter upon the subject.
Sir J. GRAHAM was most anxious that the House
should go into Committee on the Bill, as he thought it
was for the advantage of the tradihg community of the
country that it should be passed during the pre
sent session.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill had come
down to the House with the highest authority
and sanction, namely that of the Lord Chancellor and
the Master of the Rolls ; and after the best considera-
tion he had been able to give to the subject, he believed
if they went into Committee on that Bill, and passed only
two or three of its provisions, the best results would be
effected lie alluded particularly to the appointment
of fixed Commissioners responsible for the performance
of their duty, and also to the nomination of official as-
signees. They would effect a great good if they only
passed the clause which gave to the creditor the power
of summoning his debtor, and asking him whether or
not he acknowledged the debt.—(Hear, hear.) Another
most important provision in the Bill was that the certi-
ficate of the bankrupt was not to be made subject to the
caprice of his creditors, but to be decided after judicial
consideration.--(Hear, hear.) He trusted, under all

these circumstances, that without further discussion tl.e
House would consent to the committal of the Bill.
Mr. B. WOOD admitted most freely that the Bill
contained many excellent provisions, but his great ob-
jection was to its consideration at the present ad vanced
period of the session. They had been told that the
House was not likely to sit many days longer, and if
such was the case, he would ask whether it was likely
that a measure of such importance could be fairly con-
sidered.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. SCOTT would admit that the Bill contained
many clauses of great importance, but mot adapted to the
purposes intended. He thought the Bill required great
consideration, and he would therefore suggest to the
Government that the subject should be referred to a
Select Committee, and the Bill postponed to the next
session.

Mr. HAW LS thought the present measure one of the
most important that had been brought before the House
for some time, and he could not conceive what oppositi-
tion could be offered to it by the mercantile world. The
Bill contained many good provisions, by the admission of
all parties ; and he thought, therefore, that the House
should not refuse to consider it in Committee.
Sir R. PEEL said that if the House were satisfied
that the Bill was a great improvement upon the existing
law, he could not too strongly urge the policy of per-
mitting it to pass without delay. If, after having rolled
up the stone with great toil and labour, they allowed it
to descend again, they might depend upon it that they
could have no guarantee that they could place it agai:l in
the same position which it occupied before. If the Bill
were imperfect in its details, they might amend it ; and
as all parties approved of many of its provisions, he
earnestly hoped they would be allowed to proceed with
it in Committee.

After a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY,
Mr. M. PHILIPS said that he should not persist in
his motion.

The motion was then withdrawn, and the House re-
solved itself into a Committee on the Bill, Mr. GREENE
in the Chair.

Clauses up to 4 were agreed to without any discussion.
On clause 4 being put,
__ _ _

Mr. B. WOOD inZ)ved that the clause should be ex-
punged. His object was to get rid of the expence and
delay of the fiat in the form proposed.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL supported the clau;e.
Mr. B. WOOD still contended that the removal of the
clause would be • attended with advantage. The clause
was agreed to.

Claitse,s 5 to 6 were agreed to, after a short discussion.
Clauses 7,8, and 9, were also passed.
On clause 10 being proposed, Mr. B. WOOD moved
that the word " farmer "-be inserted in the clause.
Mr. AGLIONBY supported the amendment.
Mr. HENLEY opposed the introduction of this class
of persons into the clause; one bad effect of the amend-
ment would be, that landlords would be compelled to
keep their rents up close, whereas now they were gene-
rally six months in arrear, otherwise they would have no
remedy in case of failure.
The gallery was then cleared, but the amendment was
negatived without a division, and the clause agreed to.
Clauses from 11 to 19 were each severally agreed to
without discussion.

Clauses 20, up to 29, inclusive, were agreed to.
On the motion that clause 30 be omitted,
Mr. B. WOOD objected to the omission. He thought
it quite right that the landlord should only be able to
distrain for six months.

Mr. CLAY thought the present law of landlord and
tenant sufficiently stringent without giving any new ad-
vantage to the landord.

The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause
Against it

85

'Majority against retaining the clause —7B
The clause was consequently rejected.
The next clause, defining the law of partnership, was
then proposed.
Mr. B. WOOD objected to the clause.
Mr. AGLIONBY supported the clause, as he thought
it was a valuable one to the creditor, and valuable as be-
ing founded on reason and justice.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses up to 38 were agreed to.
Clauses from 38 up to 47 were agreed to with a few
verbal amendments.

On clause 48 being put,
Mr. BROTHERTON said, that at that late tour, lie
should move that the Chairman report progress—
(Hear, and cries of "Go on.") It really was too much
to expect that so important a measure should be pro-
ceeded with further at so late an hour.
Mr. GREENE—Do you divide ?
Mr. BROTHERTON—CertainIy.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw,
The motion was, however, agreed to without a division,
and the House resumed. The Chairman obtained leave
to sit again to-morrow (this day).
LAW OF EVIDENCE BILL.
This till went through Committee, Report ordered to
be received to-morrow (this day).
Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition from the wine"
merchants of Worcester, praying for a drawback to be
allowed on foreign wines.

WINE TRADE.
Mr. MASTERMAN rose pursuant to notice, to
move the following resolution :—That it having been
the uniform practice, for many years past, to allow or
to charge the wine merchants upon their stocks in
hand for any variation of duties that have taken p lace,
this House is of opinion that it is but just and rei ison-
able that the same course should be pursued n L the
event of a reduction being made of the duty upol i port
wine consequent upon the tariff to be annexed :o the
treaty with Portu„oul, notwithstanding the trans rer of
the collection of the whole of the wine dnties ;to the
Customs.

The motion having been put,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER obSpected
to the motion as being an unusual one. It called in' the
House to declare what course they should pursu e on
future occasion. He thought it would be better t con-
fine themselves to such time as the discussion of those
duties came before the House. But the main obSlection
he felt to the motion was that they could not k new to
what extent they might be imposed upon by the :returns
of those duties. Government had been imposed! upon
with regard to the returns of the silk duties, and there
was no security that the same would not be pre ctised
with regard to wine. He felt compelled to resist t) is mo-
tion of the Hon. Gentleman.

After a few observations for Lord SANDON an ci
AGLIONEY,

Sir R. PEEL hoped that nothing would inclitce the
House to sanction the motion, because if it were r4opted,
it would be a premium to fraud. Ileg'protested against
the principle of allowing a drawback upon wine, while the
same principle was not conceded to other articles import-
ported from foreign countries, and he was surprised that
his llon. Friend the Member of the " Port" of .1.-ondon,
as he had been called—(Laughter)—should brizq the
subject forward,

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said every one engage.i in the
wine trade believed that a treaty had been entente' into
between this country and Portugal, but it appeared; from
what was said by the Right Hon. Baronet, that nos such
treaty had been concluded. He thought there w; s jus-
tice in the claim made by the wine-merchants, : Intl ho
should vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for
London.

Mr. HAWES hoped the Hon. Member for th e City
of London would not press the motion to a division.
The principle would not be just unless it wes carr iod out
to other articles. He thought they were bound nt sup,
port the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr Alderman HUMPHERY thought the Riglit Hon.
Baronet had made out a strong case against the motion.
He (Mr. Humphrey) had been asked to support tit ? mo-
tion, but he felt that he could nut do so conscieutit
If this drawback were allowed, who was to open each
bottle to see if it contained wine. He thought :fraud
would be carried on extensively under such a systcn.
After a few.words from Mr. INIASTERMAN, in II ?ply,
Sir R. PEEL said that no treaty had ever bee' en,
tered into between this country and Portugal for tlae re-
duction of the duty on wine.
Mr. R. YORKE opposed the motion, as he d;il not
think it founded in justice.
The motion was negatived without a division. • •
MEETING OF THE HOUSE.

Sir R. PEEL gave notice that be should m,ree to-
morrow (this day) that the House do meet at -twelve
o'cicklt on Monday.
BONDED CORN BILL.

The Lords' amendments to the Bonded Corn Bil I were
read and agreed to.
Mr. T. BUNCOMBE wished to know if thew rit for
Ipswich would be moved for en Monday.
Sir R. PEEL said it would he moved for pit five o'clock.
The House adjourned at a Quarter past. Two o'qock.

LADVERTICEMENT.]
HOLLOWAY'S PILLS AND OINTIrENT —Aris S.
Spalding, residing at Offord, near 'Woodbridge, was
afflicted with two bad legs, for which she was three
months at the infirmary at Northampton without receiv-
ing benefit ; she was afterwards under the treatment of
Dr. Cock, of Wicker-market, and lastly was attended,
for the space of ten months, by Mr. Wedon, surgeon, at
Melton, who in the end declared " that nothing could
cure her." In consequence of this statement she used the
above medicines, which have just. performed a perfect
cure. Sold at Professor Holloway's establishment., 244,
Strand, where advice may be had gratis ; also by every
respectable chemist throughout the kingdom, in pots and
boxes at Is. ad.. 2s. 9d., 4s. 6d.. 225., and 335. each.
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council will hold
a meeting on Monday next in the Council Chamber, to
deliver judgments on appeals which have been herd by
their Lordships.