Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER, 6 1871.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 18, Issue 1113, 6 September 1871, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER, 6 1871.

so far as we can discover in the speech of Mr Sewell relative to the proposed Bankruptcy Bill, is contemplated by that Bill in reference to the much-vexed question of imprisonment for debt; and, so far as the proposals of the Government go, matters would be likely to remain on this point much as they are—that is to say, a person who had not secured funds from the wreck of his estate sufficient to carry him through the bankruptcy court would be liable to imprisonment, while another who had done so would escape that degradation and suffering. Thus it might often happen that honest poverty and misfortune would be treated criminally, while roguery might escape. What, however, the Government measure did not contemplate, a Bill introduced by Mr Gillies, Superintendent of Auckland, will probably effect. The Government, in fact, has promised its

support to the Bill which ho has introduced, and therefore it is most probable that it will become law. We consider that the community is indebted to Mr Gillies for his action in this matter, nor should due credit be withholden from the Government for giving their suppore to it when introduced by a private member, and one who, to much of their political policy, is a vigorous opponent. The fact of this relic of barbarism remaining so long on the statute book after it has ceased to fulfil its legitimate purpose is a standing disgrace to our legislature, and it happens opportunely that it can be removed at the same time that the bankruptcy law is amended and consolidated. We do not of course deny that there are fraudulent debtors who deserve imprisonment, nor that there ate others whom nothing but the dread of a prison will cause to pay their debts; but as the law stands it is these parties who most easily escape through its meshes, and the weight of its penalties fall more often on the un fortunate than on the dishonest. If these latter are to be (as they should be) punished by a term of imprisonment, let it be for their dishonesty, and not for their debt