The Globe. THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 1879.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1592, 27 March 1879, Page 2

The Globe. THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 1879.

Not many days ago, what was doomed a somewhat remarkable decision was given by a Resident Magistrate in one of our northern cities. A tradesman, who was at the time undergoing the process of what is vulgarly called “ white-washing,” sued a person in whose employ he was for monies due for work done. The defence to the claim was in effect, that the plaintiff could not recover, being, so to say, a ward of bankruptcy, who, pending his final dealing by the Court, was not a free agent in recovering debts owed to him. In the absence of any special enactment specifying what the privileges of a bankrupt were in such a case, the Magistrate took a common-sense view of the position of affairs, and ruled that the claimant was entitled to recover and make personal use of monies he had earned while under the cegidium of the Supremo Court. It is not probably the first time that the question, as well as others of a simillar character, has cropped up since the Legislature last dealt with this ever troublesome question of Law, to protect the public and the unfortunate trader. With the larger and more comprehensive issues continually raised by statesmen and smaller political fry when endeavouring to place our Bankruptcy Laws upon a finally satisfactory footing we have no desire to meddle at present. But it is with such technicalities as the one to which we have just now referred that we think Parliament should deal without any delay. Look, for instance, at what happens—or perhaps does not happen—to a man compelled to seek the assistance of the Court, in the simplest cases, where no breath of malfaisance attaches to the reasons compelling him to “ file” ? When going through the painful process, he is absolutely enjoined by the law, under severe penalties too, to give up every farthing of property, whether goods or money, he possesses; in fact ho is supposed to be —financially speaking—in a perfect state of purls naturalibus, having given everything to his creditors, or at least to the trustees of his estate. So far so good; but the fountains of judicial wisdom, from which have flowed the rules and regulations to be stringently enforced in cases of bankruptcy, have so arranged matters that before the stripped debtor —of course we take the case of an honest man—can even enter the portals of the Supreme Courts, and find there a temporary haven of rest, he must hand over, in cash, no less than £2O to his solicitor; this being the lowest foe—to be paid in advance —for which members of the learned profession will undertake to navigate the bark of their patient , through the dangerous narrows of the Law Courts. At times the sum demanded may be more, the amount varying greatly according to the monetary aspirations of the debtor’s legal adviser. Of course the debtor has the option left him to “ act for self,” as it is called; that is to say to pilot his own craft; when the fees chargeable, when he undergoes the first convulsions of being “ put through,” will amount to something like £8 or £9. But there is a good old maxim which stigmatises him who acts as his own lawyer as having a fool for a client; and never perhaps could it be more correctly applied than in those cases where laymen have personal dealings with the Bankruptcy Courts. It is furthermore well understood that Judges—and unfortunately some magistrates follow their example—set their faces against parties not appearing by counsel, and obstacles have oftentimes been put in the way of debtors by Judges, who do not disguise their eagerness to drive applicants into the clutches of the legal profession. The fees and charges to which we refer are not, it must bo remembered, imposed by any statutal enactment, but are set out by what is known as Orders in Council, which are inspired by and drafted under the guidance of the so-called representatives of the profession, i.e., the Judges, or by the Attorney-General or other high-class law officers of the Government by whom they are from time to time gazetted under the hand and seal of his Excellency the Governor for the time being, who is quite innocent of tho con-

touts of what ho thus endorses. There can ho no question that the time has long since arrived, when these legal and official absurdities should have been done away with. Sir George Grey and his ministerial satellites have ranted enough about reform since their accession to office. Wo have scarcely boon able to discover yet one single instance when the scarifying knife has been applied in a useful or practical manner. It is all very well to gush over the rights of mon —or of women either. Taxation in some of its worst aspects has gradually increased during the last few years. The fees of the lower Courts even have almost been doubled since last session. No Government has a right to make a source of revenue of the fountains of justice. On the contrary, the fees should be made so low as to permit suitors of the humblest rank to have access to the Courts. Unfortunatoly, while modorft days have witnessed an extraordinary advance in the march of civilization, all things appertaining to the administration of the law, whether it bo in or out of the Courts, have remained in all their semi-barbarous state of antiquity. Law doog not appear to be made to meet the requirements of the general public, but to suit well the views and the pockets of the legal profession. We believe wo are correct in saying that there are by far more lawyers in this colony, in proportion to the population, than is the case anywhere on the globe’s surface, the United States not excepted. And the cry is still they come. There is evidently plenty of material in Now Zealand for the profession to feed upon. And if the amounts spent —under legislative sanction —by the whole community through a useless compliance with antiquated and obsolete legal forms were totted up, it would bo found that the heaviest tax, by far, which is paid by the colonists, is that involved by the compulsory retention among us of those traditional, if grotesquely unnecessary, law expenses.