STATUTE AND STAMPS.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 43, 12 April 1873, Page 3

STATUTE AND STAMPS.

(From the Nelson Colonist.) A cask heard in the Magistrate’s Court, Nelson, lately, requires some comment here, in order that the public may better understand, than appears to have been the case hitherto, the operations of the law with respect ta the recovery of debts. The case referred to is that of Stanton versus Miles in which, plaintiff, as he alleged had supplied to defendant certain goods (in June, 1866) which defendant required for a third party, whom, however, plaintifl never recognised in the transaction. Since the time of purchase until now several applications had been made for payment but without avail, and ultimately the defendant was sued for the amount. It appears that it is pretty generally believed that the Statute of Limitations would only be available by a debtor where a creditor had neglected to prefer his claim within the prescribed six years, and that if payment had been urged within that period no advantage could be taken of the statute. Here, then, is the point where the public requires to be fully informed, for this case has gone to prove that if a creditor can be in any way cajoled to extend his credit one day beyond six years the debtor can, legally but without justice, shelter himself under the Statue of Limitations, snap his fingers at his creditors, and ‘escape the debt altogether! A written acknowledgement of debt or the speedier action to recover it must therefore be resorted to.

Another matter is the opinion existing that stamps are not required on receipts for which cheques have been given, blit this is by no means correct. By the Stamp Act Amendment Act of October last, 13th clause, it will be seen that it is expressly stated that any debt, claim, or demand, of the amount of two pounds or upwards, acknowledged to have been settled, discharged, or satisfied, must bear a stamp.