IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

Dunstan Times, Issue 340, 30 October 1868, Page 3

IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

The abolition of imprisonment fer debt for sums under £lO has been found to work very prejudicially to tradasmen resident on the goldfields, and petitions, numerously signed, have been forwarded to the General Assembly, praying that the law might operate as formerly. The matter has been brought before the House, and we extract the following from the “ Wellington Independent,” as showing the progress made : ‘‘We have been induced to make these remarks in consequence of a bill which has been before the Legislature with the object of amending an act of a proceeding session, which abolished the power of impri.onment for debt on all sums below £lO. It was found that the act in question, proved in operation, to be alike unjust to the honest tra’esman" and to his poor but honest customers. The one could not enforce payment from the debtor, who could but would not payjand the other consequently coul i not get credit except on such extravagant termc as tradesman was iu self-defence compelled to Innose. This being the state of the case co n li'n’s were naturally made to the Government that the exemption of persons, under all and every circuir.tance, from ar est for ’ebt for sums under 110 was impolitic and unjust, an consequently a bill was drafted, called the Resident Magistrate’s Act amen iment Bil l , to alter the law in this respect. This bill does not authorise i nprisonsonmont fordebtnnder £lO. but it gives to the magistrates before whom the case is heard, the power of re-hearing the case, at the instance of the creditor who had obtained a judgmentin thcregular course. If, on this rehearing, it is proved to the satisfaction of the magistrate, that the person against whom judgment was originally given is in a posicion to pay the amount due, and will not, or that he had incurred the debt in a fraudulent manner, »nd un ’er cir mnstances that must have shqvm that ho never could have paid it, then, but not otherwise, the maris'ratewill have power to commit him to ( risen, nominally for debt, but virtually for fraud. “ The Bill excite' a great deal of discuseassi in in the Legislative Council, but eventually it was passed by a majority of two to one. This large majority is the more remarkable, as, last Session, the Legislative Council had struck out the very clauses which were now assented to. This prove? that the practical operation of the A t rf last year, in the opinion of the Upper Haiue was fax different to what they anti-

cipatedjmd that, in fact, the witholdine of the modified power from the magistrate to imprison debtors under £lO, who had contracted debts fraudulently and reckless'y, hrd proved to be alike impolitic and mischevious. / “It will be seen from our report of Parliamentary that th < bill has been read a seedne time in the House of Representatives, and that there is every probability of its becoming law. If that should be the case, the dishonest debtor will no longer be able to escape from liabili ties which he has fraudulently or recklessly incurred; confidence between tradesmen and their c ista.uers will be restored, to their mutual benefit; while the debtor who is unable though willing to pay, will not b e subjected to imprisonment under the Amendment Act any more than that of last year.”