Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4858, 17 October 1876, Page 2

Wb wish to draw the attention of the Legislature to a case of great practical hardship arising out of an imperfection in the working of the Imprisonment for Debt Abolition Act, 1874. The 6th section of that Act provides for the issue of a judgment summons whenever any sum of money due under any judgment or order in any Court remains unsatisfied. The person summoned is to be examined on oath as to his means of paying, the disposal he may have made of his property, his intention of leaving the colony without paying, and the mode in which the liability was incurred. The Bth section then goes on to say that—“lf a party so summoned as aforesaid, shall not attend as required by such summons, and shall not allege a sufficient cause for not attending”—then the Court may, if he do not pay the money as. ordered by it, imprison him for three months. Now let us see how under the practical working of the letter of this Act and that of the Resident Magistrates Evidence Act, 1870, a hardship may arise. Suppose the case of a person who formerly lived on the West Coast, but now resides in Wellington, and 'has incurred :on that coast a number of small debts, each of itself inconsiderable, but in the aggregate amounting to a considerable sura., A judgment summons is issued at Hokitika requiring his attendance there to answer a demand amounting to about onerthird or so of what it would cost him to; go there in obedience to it. What, is the man to do? How is he, without personally attending, to “ allege sufficient cause for not attending?” The man is not able to meet all the demand which, if pressed, will simply drive him into the Insolvent Court, and if ho pays one of them, all the rest of the creditors will be down upon him like vultures on carrion! On referring; to the 2nd section of the Resident Magistrates Evidence Act, 1870, the words are—“ Whenever a civil action shall have been commenced,” and .“at the hearing of such action.” Now, although the case is within the equity of the latter section, it is to be feared it is not within its terms. This question has arisen in more than one case, already on this section. Suppose now, in the doubt as to whether the section applies, the debtor makes affidavit of the state of his affairs, which he transmits to the Court from which the summons has. issued. For some there is no more about it; but after some six months or so a warrant for his arrest comes here issuing out of the same Court. Again, what pan the unlucky debtor do ; how avail himself of the provisions of the Imprisonment for Debt Abolition Act ?

Suppose, now, the unfortunate debtor, thus placed with an arrest staring him in the face, and knowing that the affidavit which he has before made has been of no avail, and also uncertain whether he can avail himself of the Evidence Act referred to, pays the particular debt, although very unwilling from consideration for his other creditors so to do. Suppose also that as soon as the bailiff has got the money he immediately produces from his pocket another judgment summons issuing from the same Court on the West Coast. What, then 1 The debtor is now, fairly driven into a corner : it is plain that if pressed he must avail himself of the existing Insolvent Act. Ha accordingly, in his perplexity, takes the first steps to get protection under this law. Immediately on the filing of the statement of his inability to meet his engagements with his creditors his property is vested jn the Registrar. On attempting, in accordance with the rules prescribed, to procure a first meeting of the creditors, it is found as most of them reside on the West Hhai Coast the required number cannot be jgot together. Truly the last state of that , man is worse than the first. as Judge Wabd said, the statutes of New Zealand are fearfully and wonderfully made. Now let it be understood that wte 'are stating an actual case which has comb to our own knowledge. Apart from the unworkable nature of the Debtors and Creditors Act, would it not bp' easy and also very desirable, so to amend the Resident Magistrates Evidence Act asj t‘6 make its provisions applicable to the Case we have, instanced, thus enabling persons similarly placed to ' comply with subsection 1 Of section 8 of Imprisonment for Debt Abolition Act 1 : ’ ■'

, The case is one of great hardship, and we /trust that onoe brought to the notice of - the Legislature, steps .will .be taken to have so great an evil remedied. {