PRIVATE MEMBERS' BILLS

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2203, 16 July 1914, Page 4

PRIVATE MEMBERS' BILLS

BIPRISONRIEfJIP FOR DEBT ; SAFEGUARDS AGAINST HARDSHIP. : : .Mr.-X.H. HINDMAESH (Wellington bouth) moved tho second reading of "■- the Imprisonment for Debt' Limitation Bill. Tho proposals in £lio Bill, he ; said, were that in the event of tho Magistrate having made an order or a- ; judgment /summons, the Magistrate .:.'■. might'rehear, a case. At present a Mag- ; istrato. could send a, debtor to gaol if ho refusesl'to pay when ho : hasV-means, or if tho- debtor does'not appear, or it i •• . tho Magistrate was not satisfied with j the 'debtor's answers to questions aa to his ineah'siV Very often an order was mado in the. absonco of .tho defendant who'might fail to appear because he was ■ill, or because he hesitated to face a • I'FV 8 ■ 5 r W- r 4 t , nlso might happen that, a,debtor/failed to comply with an order because of misfortune such as loss •-'• of employment. .At. present the Magistrate had no powor to re-hear a case ■ Ho could'not; cancel or vary an orde-] ; In this Bill it was proposed to givo the Magistrate power to.hcar a case again if tho circumstances isecmed'to warrant it, and then to cancel or'vary an order made,, even by way of making' if more i severe. It was a' fact "within his knowJedgo that orders were sometimes made against men which should not have been mado, and tlfis happened, tho mono often tho men were too poor to pay for professional advice. Another proposal 1 in the Bill -was that no adjournriient tees should bo payable in respect cf judgment summons cases. Theso fees wero frequently used by debt-collecting .; agencios as a means of getting inonev cut of'debtors,- which the debtors ought' not to havo been required to pay. Ho ; trusted the Government: would-, give tho ■■': . Bill favourable consideration. .•':. Ros,ourco to Imprisonment. ; \ Mr. E.P. Os, (Oamaru). said thero ' was no .inipfisoiipient for debt at pre- '■-■ i- ■ sent;- -A-debtor was sent to gaol only when he had means wherewith to pay, aijd' yet declined to pay. The pro. ; . cedure now gave the judgment debtor ample notice that'he was required tp attend at the court to stnto his fiimncial position, and conduct monjey was provided for any expense inourred in coming to the Court.. .There were perhaps possibilities of a man having nq ■; order mado against him through misfortune, such as .the missing of a train • or steamer. Ho would vote for tljo second reading of thp Bill, but ])o hoped that in Committee •soino provisions '/ would bo put Into tho Bill tp prevent .*■ debtors from playing fast and loose with :; the Courts. Ho did not believe that adjournment fees. shovj<l be: remitted,

for ho thought it was fair that people coming boforo tho Courts should jiay tho fees necessary for the maintenance of tho Courts and tho administration of justice. Olhcnwse tho cost would fall oil the general public. Mr. C. E. STATIIAM (Dunedin Ccntral) said he would support tho Bill, which was ono to commend itself to members of tho legal profession who understood tho law and the procedure. Tho principle of the law, now was not to allow creditors to be vindictive, and ho believed there was room for - some improvement in our law to prevent creditors from- harassing honest debtors who wero doing their best to discharge their liabilities. He favoured' the prc£ posal to remit adjournment fees in judgment debt cases. . 4 Mr. J. A. HANAN (Inyercargill) said ho would support "the Bill, but he believed.that only oh very rare occasions tho. powjer <to be conferred r .on Magistrates would be. exercised. Mr. T. K. SIDEY j(Waitaki) congratulated the. member on having introduced the Bill. Ho thought the momber;might bo wiso in having it referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. ■ Mr. J. V. BROWN (Napier) thought that the member should try and have a clause inserted in the Bankruptcy Act, whereby a man might file a petition without having to pay to do so. ■ • Restriction on oVeclit. : ..Mr. C...A.' (Egniont) thought that the credit system was too deeply rooted,in this country. He would favour a clause making it im-possible-for a trader to recover at all under a certain sum, say £10. .Restriction of. credit; wbtiid be/good' for both workers arid- the-country. ' .Mr J. PAYNE (Grey'Lynn) also thought"that the - credit system was' wrong. He would throw upon the traders the., onus' of getting cash, or, losing their debts. ; .■/. .SIR JOSEPH; WARD. (Awarua) said that theoretically it was all very well to say that a; man should • not receive ■credit up: to'£lo.—lt would; not hpmy. under , the present conditions. It was right enough for the' man who had a permanent position, and was not dependent on {lis! work every day to keep his home going., A poor man might bo out of work, and would be kept from .getting credit to tide him over a short period of unemployment. What about 1 the thousands of casuals in the employ of the Railway Department? What were they going to do? . , : Mr. Payne: The' State could step in.' Sir Joseph Ward: It is all very well the ion. member talking about the State stepping irt; The State .is not in a position to do that. The beneficial advantages of credit applied all over'the world and applied just as much to'the worker as to. the .business .man. ■■ .Mr. Wilkinson: It is not intended to prevent credit up to £10. ■• ' .-.; Sir Joseph Ward: If you make it im-. possible for'.'.the small.trader, or even the large trader, to recover on dehts upto.JSlO, then, he is going to refuse to give credit. In his opinion they would do an immense harm to the 'worker, instead of good,, by imposing such 'a restriction. The Hon/A', L. HERDMAN (Attor-ney-General) said that he understood that rtho' member meant to argue fithat ■' it! was unfair ', 'for a ,' scrupulous, storekeeper .to get the worker into his debt,;and then to take, him before the Court.; He did not; say Jib agreed with the views expressed. ' Hej.qiiito realised that .'men'going on: railway and kiiidred works must depend oif the--' local,-storekeeper until they had .eaniejh sonio money. Tho provision of imprisbiinysnt for debt was to meet the, case of the man who got .money, by fraud, and the man who, having sulHt cient moniiy, refused-to pay his debts. tt',al3o"'scrved to safeguard traders. Ho could,not think that tho Bill would bo of any-practical advantage. As far as ho.understood/ ihe Magistrates,,;were always'particular ''inK-mquirmg'iinto all cases before making orders.' Ho thought the Bpl wanted more consideration. .: Tlio'suggestion thrown out that' it. should go to the Statutes Revision Committee was a good ono. He would see that they .got the Bill for further 'consideration -if .that was done. , ]• The Bill was read a second time on the voices.; CHA'BTERED clubs. ■ EXEMPT FROM'■'■ ARBITRATION "'■■■• ■-;■:■/■-. AWARDS.. Mr. A. H. HIiDMARSH (Wellington South) moved the second reading of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment' Bill. - Chartered, clubs,' he said,, did not come: under the provisions' of tho'Arbitration''Court, becaiise; they did:not run for profit. Still'.they .employed a great number/of hands;"-The amendment he proposed wouldbr|ng chartered clubs wider'the provisions'of the industrial awards. The fact that the: club v>a& not working for a profit did not help the woriier tnero when ho was 'deprived of a holiday, which a similar worker in a restaurant across' the road was . getting. . There were some hundreds-.of men deprived of benefits that".their: fellow-workers' in hotels' enjoyed.'.:. ' 'Air: J. PAYNE (Grey Lynn) thought that every right-minded individual in- the Dominion would be in agreement .with the Bill. '-,-■.. .Mr J. H. BRADNEY (Auckland West) thought there was more in/the' Bill than■ was apparent. Clubs'' were practically homes to some men. The member who had last spoken l would' want to force the Arbitration Court iiito' .the' homes.. He would.be in favour of the Bill if he thought that the workers in clubs were oppressed. They wore not and he would opiose the Bill SIR] JOSEPH WARD, (Awarua) did not" think thero were many club members who wished to have'tlio workers in clubs treated differently to other workers, so far as the la;ys of the country were 'concerned. Ho did not ■ think club members wanted special "prpvision for chartered cliibs. ' ' The Right Hon. W. F. MASSEY said that he had no objection-to tlio Bill. He did not: see that if could.do harm, nor' did he think it would do iuuch good. Ho happened to belong to somo i clubs, and he did not know that there was any demand for the Bill. Ho did not believe that it 'was the custom to require employees in clubs to work moro than six days a week. He thpught tho proper thing to do was to refer the'Bill to the Labour Bills Committee, and he (Mr.'"Massey) would see that the Bill had a fair run before the committee. Mr. L. M. , ISITT, (Chrjstchurch North) combated the/ statement that clubs-were practically in tho same position as a home. He had heard a very different ta!p from-wives of some frer quonters'pf working'men's clubs. These clubs wero very often 'destructive-', of homos—institutions for the distribution' I of cheap beer, institutions which spoilt ; thousands a year in liquor, and £20 to. I £<10 on literature. He supported the Bill. : •••'■'■■'■•"Bill Read a SGcond Time. :;Mr. W.-'H. D. BELL (Wellington Suburbs) deprecated what, had been said about clubs, suggesting that they wero corrupt organisations or worse. Me did not think these remarks were justified! However, ho.did not object to tho proposal for club servants being brought under the Arbitration Act. hut he did not think club servants were so badly treated' as to need or require the protection of the Act. H-i did not even tiiiiijti'tliev desired it. Mr. J. ROBERTSON (Otaki) thought thatrfclubs were supply in'the position of being ep-pperative hotels. They' should-lint be exempt from the law. Thorßjll was. read'a secojid time on l-lie voices. . '•"■-"Mr."Robertson said that he had the authority of tlio member for Wellington' South to move that tl)c Hill 'should bo ■referred to the Labour Bills Committee. The Bill was referred to i||o labour Bills"Comniittce. On the motion of the Prime Minister, the. Howe rose at 0.6 a.m.