New-York tribune., 1905-02-17
ATTACHING THE BANKRUPTCY ACT

The Judiciary Committee of the House of
Representatives has reported a bill repeating
the Federal Bankruptcy law. Much surprise
has been expressed at this action. for, so far
as public knowledge goes, there has been no
marked or general dissatisfaction with the
workings Of the so-called Torrey act of 1898
That act was in a measure experimental 1t
had defects. But most of these defects were
remedied-or were thought TO be remedied-in
the amendatory act of 1903. Since then there
have been few complaints lodged against the
bankruptcy system. No demand for it's repeal
has been discoverable. No petitions were pre-
sented to the Judiciary Committee favoring
repeal bill. and no hearings were held while
that bill was pending. The committee seems
simply TO have decided that on general princ-
pies jurisdiction over bankruptcy proceedings
should be ceded by the nation TO the States.
The main argument urged in favor of repeal
IS that national regulation can now be dispensed
with without injury TO business interests The
advocates of return TO State regulation say
that the national system has done its work and
can be set aside until another exceptional occa-
sion arises for reviving and applying it. In
good times in other words. there is practically
no use for a federal bankruptcy system, State
insolvency laws sufficing 10 protect the debtor
and safeguard the creditor. Against this view
it is not surprising 10 find a protest filed by
hYe or the Republican members OF the judi
ciary Committee. Mr.. Powers of Massachu-
setts who writes the minority report, and
Messrs. Littleheld. of Maine; J. y. Gillette, Of
California: Jenkins. of Wisconsin, and Nevin.
OF Ohio stoutly combat the theory that a
federal bankruptcy law is, in effect. a mere
emergency measure. TO be enforced in hard
times and abandoned in good ones. They ad-
nit that our present prosperity has relieved the
strain on the debtor class and that ''it is pos
"sible now for every creditor TO be treated with
Justice and fairness" But they contend that
the existence of a national bankruptcy law has
in itself contributed not a little to strengthen
confidence in the credit system, and that re
peal now. with return TO State laws, diverse
"in provision and practice, and in many cases
providing preferences for resident creditors -
will iniure credit and tend 10 hamper business.
The present bankruptcy law, they say. is ECO
.nomical prompt efficient and well admins
tered" Why. then, abandon the system SIM
rly because for the moment il seems posi-
bic TO get along without it?
From another point of view the committees
decision TO urge repeal is even more astonishing
surrendering an acknowledged federal power 10
the states hardly fits with our present ideas OF
political progress. IL is, IN fact a step back
,Card II destroys one jurisdiction and creates
fortyfve; and It encourages the setting up OF
c.ote limos everywhere as barriers TO the con
d,,o4 ~ interstate business. a House of Rep
,ese,totives which has voted 10 increase the
Governments regulatiye power over railroad
rates would hardly be logical in aDoiishihs tla'
federal control over bankruptcy proceedings