Star.
London, England, 1831-10-06 00:00:00

BANKRUPTCY BILL.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the second read-
:ng of the Bankruptcy Bill.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS said that nothing had been stated
in opposition to the bill to shake his opinion as to the neces-
sity of the measure to improve the present state of the law
upon the subject. The whole system had a direct tendency
to delay and prolong the ends of justice. The principles upon
whichthe Bankruptcy Court was conducted were at variance
with the mode that was pursued by any Court of Justice.
The present mode of appointing the Commissioners of Bank-
ruptcy was vicious, and had for its sole object to provide for
young men who had no experience In the law ; those were
facts that could not be denied. The system embraced every
degree of objectionable principle. The hon. member refer.
red to the report of the Committee appointed to inquire into
the subject, to prove the peat evils of the present system
and contended that a reform of those abuses was loudly
called for. The honourable and learned gentleman then
referred to the opinions and evidence of several distinguished
lawyers, as published hi works, and taken before Committees
and Commissioners, expressive of the inefficiency of the
existing system of administering the Bankrupt laws. One
beneficial effect of this measure would be to diminish the
number of appeals to the Court of Chancery, for the Court
of Appeal proposed by this Bill would try issues respecting
bankruptcy, which often, after long litigation in the Court
of Chancery, were referred to the Common Law Courts.—
The honourable and learned member here entered into a
long calculation of the expenses incurred in the different
stages of proceedings in Bankruptcy cases, and compared
them with the expenses which would arise from the system
now proposed, pointing out the great advantages which
would arW from the latter. He passed a high eat opium on
the more than human exertions of the present Lord Chan-
cellor to 6et rid of the arrears of his Court. In answer to
the objecuon respecting the extraordinary patronage which
this bill would create for the Lord Chancellor, be begged
to say tnat the patronage under the present system was
greater than the patronage created by this measure. He re-
collected having heard that Lord Erskine was only 24 hours
Lord Chancellor when he had 106 applications, principally
from peers of the realm, to appoint some of their relatives
commissioners of bankrupts.
Sir B. SUGDEN thought the learned gentleman should
have sought some other opportunity to speak of the merits
of the Lord Chancellor. It was indiscreet to forge down
upon them the bill, by bringing forward the opinions of the
noble Chancellor, and force remarks in justice from others,
who might have the same respect for the Lord Chancellor
with himself. For such remarks, so provoked, the noble
turd would have to thank his learned friend. The learned
baronet then proceeded to say, that he had the most pro.
found respect for the Lord Chancellor, but when be
heard him so lauded for his exertions in the dispatch of
business, he felt himself bound to say, that he colud-
slered it impossible that any mortal man could devote so
many hours a day to matters requiring so grave sonsideration.
andjcould profitably discharge his duty to the public. if it
were possible that any man could endure the tell of attend-
ance without shortening leis days, or killing himself, the
Lord Chancellor could not make proper decisions, as he bad
never had the opportunity of acquiring the ne ry legal
knowledge In the Court of Chancery. It was the larned
baronet's opinion, be said, that the noble Lord Chancellor
bad obtained great credit for what it was impossible be could
be entitled to. The learned baronet proceeded to =hoed-
Ten on the Laws of Bankruptcy as they stood. He said be
IVY opposed to many of the items of the practice, andtLarti.
cularly to the admission of affidavits. With regard to al-
leged confusion that was said to exist before the Commission-
ers, be could say it was like the disorder of a country dance,
there was peas order in the confusion. And these Commis-
sioners were to be replaced by ten judges, or call them what
you like, who were to be fixed for life; and how was any
one to know that those so appointed were to be qualified for
their office. He bad understood that the ministry had come
in with a detonation of economy and retrenchment, but he
could assure them that this alteration In that court of law,
with the judges to be pensioned, would be a much greater
expense to the public than the present constitution. He ri-
diculed the ides of having 10 judges and 10 registrars; he said
that 6 judges and 10 registrars would do far more business.
He was tired of hearing what Lord this and Lord that had
done; he had expected that this present administration was one
of purity, and not encompass the errors of others. He then
contended at considerable length that the Lord Chancellor
was increasing his emoluments and diminishing his busi-
ness. He approved of the retiring pension of 6,0001. He
denied that the measure was necessary ; the Vice-Chancel. 1
liar, under whose jurisdiction the almost entire bankruptcy
business was placed, bad full time and ability to dispose of
it; there were us present no bankruptcy arrears in Chan.
The new judges (at 3,0001. and 2,0001. salaries)
would dispose of the business in thirty-five days. He consi-
dered the official assignees did not offerj sufficient guarantees,
for the safety of the large sums deposited in their bands.
complained that the Bill squandered away the fund in
Chancery, called the "dead fund," which should be con.
sidered as a sacred deposit. He concluded by saying that
Ministers bad greatly disappointed him after their great
Promises of Reform in Chancery. Had the late Govern-
ment remained in office, all the abuses of that Court would
have been long since removed. (Hear.)
Mr. Sergeant WILDE contended that the Honourable
and Learned Gentleman ought to have shown that the pro-
posed Court could not accomplish the objects which it was
intended to attain. He would support the measure, because
he was convinced that it would be highly beneficial to the
country.
Mr. J. SMITH said, the present system was a source of
:much fraud, delay, and expense. The Court of Review
could greatly diminish these evils. The official assignee
Would operate as a salutary check on the assignees named by
'he creditor,.

The bill was then read a second time.
After a few words from Mr. Knight, Mr. Omdburn,
Lord Althorp, &c. the bill was ordered to be committed on
Ittday next.
On the motion that the vestries bill be read a third time,
Mr. R. TREVOR having several objections to offer to
the Bill, which he was reluctant to enter into at that late
hour of the night, would move the postponement of the
second reading.
After a rev words from Mr. PROVE:IEIIOE and
9thrrs,—The House divided
For the postponement 8 I Against 361 Majority 28
The Bill having been read a third time, the other Ordure
of the Day were di•pused of, and the Roue Adjourned at
.1 Quarter to Two o'clock.

THE EVENING STAR.

LONDON, THURSDAY, OCT. 6.

ERRATUM. YMITEILDAIG—ID the node. of the York
Association, for through NOW read throw light.

Onz &tuna, 'NIS DAT—Thermometer, 66. Be.
roman. 2942. Weather, showery. Wind S.W.

What will the PEOPLE do, if the Loans throw
out the Bill ? What they ought to do is evident—
they ought to be CONSISTENT, FIRM, and UNANI-
mous. Let them persevere, by all efficient means,
in reaffirming the principles which they have al.
ready espoused; and NEVER RELAX till they have
achieved an effectual Parliamentary Reform. There
is no want of intelligence or energy in the leaders
and Committees connected with public meetings,
and they know their duty, and will perform it; but
all those who have hitherto supported them must,
in the event of a defeat, redouble their zeal. And,
above all, the friends of Reform must beware of any
RE-ACTION on the part of their enemies, who, on
gaining any small advantage, will be prompt in
displaying their smothered malignity.
There would have been a Parliamentary Reform
after the public excitement on the subject in 1791
and 1792, but for a re-action of the selfish
minority of the nation. That re-action was con-
ducted by the Lords, the Clergy, the close Corpora-
tions, and the Tory Lord-lieutenancy, with their
supple Magistracy. These contrived at that time,'
to play on the fears of the timid and neutral ; and
thereby, for several years, converted their minority
into a majority; and hence the subsequent wars,
lead the frightful waste of the treuures and resour-
ces of the nation. Then, be it observed, the very
same parties are still in existence, and though sub-
dued,continue to be actuated bythe same malign and

selfish feelings. We therefore cite that too memo-
ruble case, as an emphatical warning to the Re-
formers of the present day. We say again they
must be FIRM, CONSISTENT, and having hot one
object, be UNITED AS ONE NUN. Happily at this
time the public cause has allies in a vsvßiovic
SOVEREIGN, and his PATRIOTIC MINISTERS; and
it is also nobly sustained by a MAJORITY of the
House of Commons. These are circumstances

which give confidence to hope ; but we repeat that
vigilance is necessary; and above all things despair,
lukewarmness, and division, are to be avoided.

We do not write the preceding paragraphs un-
der the impression, that there are any increased
reasons for doubting the decision of the Lords. We
differ from many persons who impeach the sound
judgment of noble legislators, and think that what-
ever may be the relative wisdom of their House,
too many of their Lordships are wise and discreet
enough to yield to the intelligence of the age—to
the wishes of the at teo—and the unanimous voice
of the Puma. We think that a majority must
be even more sensible of the deleterious workings
of the infamous and disgraceful rotten-borough
system, than any of the people, however much they
may have suffered from the system.
There ate a large party in the country who con-
ceive that a Bill passed by the Commons for re-
gulating its own constituency, ought to have passed
the Lords as mere matter of form. If the Lords
had passed any Bill for regulating their own House,
would not their Lordships have deemed it imper-
tinent and indecorous, if the House of Commons
had presumed to discuss its provisions as an imme-
diate affair of its own ? At the same time, the
Constitution, with marked jealousy, prohibits, in
letter and spirit, any interference of any Peer with
the House of Commons, while there are no such
restrictions imposed on the House of Commons with
regard to Peers. We do not positively affirm, that
the assent of the House of Lords was not necessary
to such an Act of Parliament; nor that the limo
and Commons might render this arrangement Law,
without the assent of the House of Peers; but the
peculiar case rendered it—as is presumed—a point
of courtesy with the Peers to interfere as little as
possible. Such a discussion as that which has been
taking place was certainly not expected, though
such a course may be admitted to be, in severity
of construction, within the spirit of the Constitu-
tion. These considerations have, therefore, their
full weight with the people, in considering the
possibility of a disappointment.

The debate in the Lords was last night con-
tinued with the same earnestness as on previous
evenings, and it seems likely to be maintained
through the week. The Tories continue con-
fident of victory, and it is impossible for us to
anticipate the result from what can be learnt
is and around the house. The petitions were
less numerous, though at least 100 were presented
in favour of the Bill, aiSd about a dozen against
it, one of which was by Lord Coventry from some
persons at Worcester, and in presenting it, his
Lordship made some pertinent observations in re-
gard to his own disinterested opposition. Lord
Whamcliffe introduced a preliminary discussion
on the language of some of the speaker. at
the Birmingham meeting particularly Mr.
Haynes and Mr. Attwood ; and those gentlemen will
we are persuaded, have no objection to this addi-
tional circulation of their opinions. The Lord
Chancellor defended the meeting, as did Earl
Grey. About twenty other Lords spoke also,
creating a preliminary debate in regard to that
meeting, and. to points which grew out of the
discussion.

The debate on the Bill itself was commenced by
Lord Dudley, who denounced it as destructive of
the Constitution. The Marquis of Lansdowne then
took a very comprehensive view of the entite sub-
ject, and of the state of the country, laud-
ing the Bill, as promising the greaten advan-
tages and security. The Marquis of London-
derry was short, and treated the Bill as the
precursor of universal suffrage. Lord Goderich
then took an enlarged view of the subject, and
concluded by declaring that the Bill would be as
beneficial to their lordships as to the country.
Lord Haddington opposed with considerable powers
of argument and eloquence. The best speech of
the evening was the acute and sensible one of
Lord Radnor, who exposed the rotten borough
system by a history of his borough of Downton.
At haltpast one o'clock the debate was adjourned.
In the House of Commons, three Bills of great
public interest engaged attention—that against
the Truck system was passed after a division of
four against it, and sixty-one in its favour. The
Bankruptcy Bill was read a second time ; and the
Select Vestries Bill was passed by thirty-pia
against eight. A call of the House is fixed for
Monday, with the view to ulterior measures, if the
Lords should reject the Bill.
Ne sre persuaded our coders will thank us for
giving place, in our last page, to the excellent
Speech of General PALMER. It deserves to be
read at every fire-side in the Empire.

This day despatches were received at the
Foreign Office from Paris, Brussels, and the
Hague.
This afternoon Lord Hill held a Levee at the
Homo Guards. It was attended by five General
Cascara, and about twenty-five others.