THE Thames Guardian AND MINING RECORD. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 11,1871.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 4, 11 October 1871, Page 2

THE Thames Guardian AND MINING RECORD. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 11,1871.

The now Insolvency Bill is another instance of of that class of unsettled legislation for which the Xew Zealand Parliament has earned such unenviable notoriety. The old Debtor and Creditor Ordinance was repealed, and a cumbrous Insolvency Law substituted in 1865. When this bill .was passing', ip was pronounced perfect by tuore than one expert in the Assembly: but this

opinion soon appeared to have been a prejudiced one, for it happened that no sooner was the Parliament dissolved than two of these gentlemen received the appointment of accountants in Bank ruptey, or inspectors, under the Act. One of these, Mr. Thomson, of Canterbury, soon after died ; the second, Mr. George Brodie, of Otago, remains to this day in the position which he attained under the Bankruptcy Act, which lie so strenuously advocated in 1865. Again, in 1867, the Bankruptcy Law was revised. The Act elaborated with so much care by the old Parliament did not work so well as had been expected from it; and a new and more cumbrous law, founded on the .Scotch bankruptcy system was passed. This, according to its advocates, was to be a final measure It embodied everything that was good in principle, and provided for every possible contingency. But, in truth, it was three distinct Acts jumbled into one, without mutual dependence or agreement, and so it has happened that the judges of the Supreme Court, by whom it has been worked, have been unable to bring all its parts into operation. In short, the parts arc in several material points conflicting and repugnant. But this Act had some good points. It concontinued Mr. Brodie in office, and made a “ snug billet ” for another politician, who happened to represent, on this occasion, an Auckland constituency. But this Act has been a failure absolutely. There has been no redeeming feature in it. The creditors have been defrauded systematically, and dishonest debtors have no difficulty in obtaining the necessary amount of legal whitewash to set them all right again with the commercial world. According to the statistics of bankruptcy laid before Parliament, out of a total of insolvencies in New Zealand, amounting to upwards of £600,000, the creditors only received about 6d. in the pound from the bankrupt estates. The balance of assets were swallowed up in expenses of one kind or another. Accordingly, we have a bran new Act introduced, of nearly two hundred clauses. The Bill bad passed through all its stages in the Legislative Council, and was before the House of Representatives at the date of our latest mail from the South. A select committee was appointed to consider and report on the Bill, and judging from its constitution, we apprehend that the New South Wales Act, which is shorter and simpler, would find favour with it. Imprisonment for debt should disappear. Our own opinion is in favour of a repeal of the laws affecting insolvent debtors, leaving the matter to be one of private arrangement between debtor and creditor. The general experience of business men is this, that creditors are extremely lenient to debtors who show a disposition to pay, and who have traded prudently; and we see no reason why we should, by legislation, assume the contrary to be the fact. It might even be desirable to abolish civil process altogether, because we see no good reason why the whole body of the public should be taxed to provide machinery whereby A or B can enforce civil contracts against Cor D. But such is the practical result of the existing machinery of our civil Courts. The lawyers as a class profit by these proceedings ; but the country in general, and suitors in particular, suffer loss. But we fear tve have exhausted the patience of our readers, on this theme. Suffice it to say that the Bill creates a new Court, and calls into being a host of officials, all of whom must be maintained out of the bankrupt estates. The creditors may guess, therefore, how small a portion of the assets will fall to their share. In any event, however, the law will not be final. It will require amendment, or to be repealed within a couple or three years from its passing.