The Evening Star TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1871.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2680, 19 September 1871, Page 2

The Evening Star TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1871.

In the couvse of our clllty as J ourna* lists we have published for the information of our readers an analysis of the proposed bankruptcy law. We trust that it will have attracted the attention it deserves, although it is not a very inviting subject for study. Yet it is one that more or less concerns every one in the community. There arc none so high in station who may not either directly or indirectly be affected by the bankruptcy of others ; there are none so poor as not to be liable to have their poverty intensified through the same causes. Liability to insolvency must ever subsist where credit forms a part of the system of trade, and, in no civilised country can it be prosecuted without it. It is a favorite theory with many far-seeing men, that commerce would be very much better conducted without bankruptcy laws, because then much more circumspection would be exercised in giving credit than now. There is little doubt that commerce has a wonderful power of adapting itself to circumstances, and it is very probable that in the long run society would be better where only men of the highest character for integrity and ability could obtain credit. But we have not reached that moral and intellectual standard yet : nay, so far are we from it, that it is found advantage is taken both by debtors and creditors of every chance that the law allows them to gain, whosoever may be loser in a division of an estate. Trade, where credit is given is really a division of ultimate profits amongst a number of agents in proportion to the capital and labor invested in the distribution of commodities. The retailer gathers up the value of the fragments; the merchant receives these aggregated in bulk j so that after all men are agents to each other lor mutual advantage. It follows, therefore, that where there are these reciprocal benefits,' the law, in defining the equity of a case of bankruptcy, must protect the interest of the debtor as well as that of the creditor. It becomes, therefore, a very nice point so to balance the right and wrong of the matter, that the creditor shall not be allowed to oppress nor the debtor to swindle. Unfortunately all attempts at this balancing of interests have to this time proved abortive —they have leaned too much to the one side or the other. There was a time when the Fleet prison was crowded with debtors, who had no hope of release until death set them free. Our old novelists give sometimes startling, sometime ludicrous, descriptions of that world of men exiled from hope in this world, through extravagance, immorality, or misfortune. There was a period in commercial history when it was thought that the debtor ought to be the bond- . man of the creditor. When more phi- | lanthropic views were adopted, they were only woven into law by creating a sympathy in favor of the debtor ; and this unfortunately could Only be effected by damaging the position of creditors and bolding them up to the world as men determined to have their “ pound “ of flesh,” no matter what misery was inflicted on their less fortunate fellowmen. The consequence has been that our bankruptcy laws have erred on the othdr side, and given too much, if we may term it so, protection to the debtor. The legislation of the last few years has been an endeavor to retrace our steps so as to, if possible, reach the happy medium : but it has not been accomplished. It seems to us that do what we will—form what regulations we may —their success depends much more upon the judicipus administration of the law than the law itself, _ Every bankruptcy law, to be satisfactory, must be based on certain generally acknowledged principles. It must provide for a division of a bankrupt’s estate in just proportions to each creditor, without favor and without preference, and its penalties must be directed against any selfish attempts to defraud, either by the debtor or the creditors. It becomes therefore a special branch of law. One great alteration proposed, therefore, by the Bill, is to take jurisdiction in bankruptcy altogether out of the hands of the judges of the Supreme Court, and to institute courts of bankruptcy with judges or registrars whoso sole duty it will be to see to the equitable administration o insolvent estates. There can be no doubt that this is a wise step. It is impossible that that minute attention necessary in such multifarious transactions as arc involved in winding up insolvent estates, could be properly attended to by judges of the Supreme Court. It was an addition to their already onerous dirties that rendered strict attention to all impossible ; and as criminal and civil suits, with arguments in banco, involve so much time and care, and as creditors themselves, as a rule, take the leading part in winding up bankrupt estates, they have been left to do it pretty much without too much supervision, and the

consequence has been, on the principle that what is business is nobody’s business, waste and laxity in the haste to realise, get a dividend, and get rid of the trouble. We have no doubt our judges will be' glad to be relieved from very unpleasant duties, and that the more strict supervision of proceedings in bankruptcy that this Bill contemplates will result in a better and more careful system of trade than has been the practice hitherto.