South Canterbury Times. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2644, 10 September 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1881.

SECOND EDITION.

People do not need to be told that Sir George Grey is nut a discreet politician. In whatever direction he moves he travels too far. He seldom succeeds in dragging any substantial lollowing after him. In practical matters fciir George knows nothing of

expediency, though at times he has resorted to expedients to win the applause of the masses. He has not been a successful statesman, and it is very questionable, after bis shiftiness in regard to the Representation Bill, if be possesses that admiration by the multitude which he so dearly loves. Still, he would be a dull man who would say that Sir George Grey does not entertain enlightened ideas on many questions of the first magnitude. His ideas, however, do not fit in with the times. It may be urged that the fault is with the times and not with the man. That is only partly correct. It is the extremist of his ideas that he brings prominently forward. The educational influence of Sir George Grey’s utterances may be great, but no practical result follows them in thepresent. Perhaps he is content to work for that posterity which has afforded so much chaff for his opponents both in Parliament and the Press. Ridicule is regarded as the most powerful of weapons. They say that it almost invariably kills a Frenchman ; but Sir George Grey is of tougher material. There has been more ridicule heaped upon him than upon any half-dczen men in New Zealand, yet he has not appreciably swerved from the path he deems right —or wrong. He is a brave man from the crown of his head to the sole of his foot.

During the present session Sir George Grey introduced two Bills, which were in our opinion steps in the right direction. One of those measures was the Law Practioners Bill, throwing the practice of the profession open to nil persons of good character who were able to pass the required examination in law. The Bill passed the House of Representatives, and would have had a chance of passing the Council if it had provided for an educational qualification. There is nothing anti-democratic in a slight acquaintance with Latin and a knowledge of general subjects. Sir George Grey insisted that the legal profession should he thrown open to the son of the poorest man in the country, regardless of the fact that the poor man’s son devoid of knowledge would be ill-equipped in that fierce struggle for existence which characterises the legal perhaps more than any other profession. The Protection of Debtor’s Bill introduced by Sir George Grey, and thrown out on Thursday, in the House by So to 2S votes, wa,s a measure with a worthy object. But it had the usual fault ; it went too far for the times. The Bill provided that all goods up to the value of £SO should be exempt from seizure for rent, debt, or any other cause, and to allow bankrupts to letain property to the same amount. Now, anyone taking a common-sense view of the subject will see that the amount has been fixed too high. There arc a great many persons in the country who, if they possessed £SO, worth of goods would consider themselves in affluent circumstances —that they had secured the luxuries of life as well as the necessaries. With regard to bankrupts being allowed to retain property to the value of £SO, there need bo no hesitation in saying that many of thorn would after they had filed find themselves in a better position than numbers of the unfortunate creditors. It- is the general opinion that an amendment of the Bankruptcy Laws is required,but certainly not in the direction of further protection to debtors. Future legislation on the subject will turn the otherway. In regard to the seizure of goods for small debts, the present law is decidedly severe and against the spirit of humanity. It leaves a person entirely at the mercy of his creditor. Let us instance the case of a man who works for small wages, be Ire clerk, artizan, or laborer. In time of full work, if he is a married man, it takes all he can earn to keep his family in decency and comfort. If he gets thrown out of employment, a frequent contingency in these times, he must, to prevent his wife and children starving, contract a few debts. If he has a spark of pride be will not subsist on charity. In the course of a few weeks, perhaps months, be fails to obtain employment. His creditor becomes impatient, and to secure himself obtains an order to distrain on the debtor’s goods, and sells every article of furniture, literally leaving the man and his family homeless. It is frequently stated that there is seldom such a harsh application of the law. A visit to the auction rooms in the large towns will dispel that illusion. As for saying that a creditor seldom sells the last stick of a man’s furniture unless he believes the debtor is able to pay if he liked, that is sheer nonsense. Ro person would let his “ household gods ” be sacrificed under the hammer if he could possibly help it. The better class of tradesmen scarcely ever exercise the full powers of the law. It is the shady, unfeeling, and unprincipled who show no mercy to a man in depressed circumstances. As for the relation of landlord and tenant, we see no valid reason why the former should be placed in a more advantageous position than an ordinary creditor. If the Protection of Debtors Bill had aimed at exempting goods to the value of £2O, it would have been just and reasonable. But it is not in Sir George Grey’s line to attempt any practicable measure of reform. He might with as much success have striven to abolish recovery of debt by civil process as to aim at obtaining a £SO exemption for debtors.