COMMERCIAL MORALITY.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2629, 12 June 1877, Page 3

COMMERCIAL MORALITY.

The Wellington Evening Post has tho following remarks upon llio recent '• bust up" of Mr O'Shea, of Wellington :—

On the case itself, wo may offer a word or two of comment.. To outsiders, who do not understand the mystery of " working the oraclo " by means of uccominodat.ion bills, it seems perfectly astounding that a man could commence business JB2O to the ha 1!, carry on for threo years, live fit tho rate of £1700 a year, purchase properties*, spend money in improving them, iiud yet, while doing all this, be steadily going ilown bill at the rate of £4000 a year, without the great body of his creditors in tlie lensT. suspecting what, was the real state of the c so. Naturally, when the crash came, and it was found that there were liabilities .of £29,00 and a deficiency of £18,000, there was much strong indignation expressed by tho creditors. Practically, however, no penalty is imposed upon a perfon who tradee in this manner, and j inflicts heavy loss upon everyone who has had anything to do with Mm. Self-interest rises superior to anger, the creditors take the bust composition they cuti get, the whole matter is smoothed over, and the debtor is left at liberty to commence denovo. In the interests of society it certainly would have been better that Biich a cose should have gone through the Cjurfc, and there been subject 3 to the most rigid scrutiny. Creditors, however, may be excused by thinking that a dividend of a shilling or so. more in the pound than they would get if the e&t.ato wus passed through tsie Court, ia of more consequence to them thanthe interests of society. The moral of Mr O'Shea's case is that if traders^ will get into debt, it. is better, from their point of view, to do it on the largest possible seal.*. A poor clerk or small tradesmon who gets a little behind hand, and yet makes a manly struggle to pay his way, is dunned aud worried, and harassed till his very life is made a burden to him. Nay, should creditors be vindictivo, and the debtor too proud 1o seek the protection of the Bankruptcy Court, ho may be eont to gaol, aud his family left, to starve outside. But let the debtor go in for a big' thing and tho case is entirely altered. He may dress in purple and fine linen, fare sumptuously every day, ride well-bred horses, live in a haudsome house, and enjoy all the delights of travel for years together at the expense of his creditors, without any further penalty than having a Blight disagreeable meeting with them when the inevitable smash comes. Then the debtor offers a composition, the creditors accept it, and the whole business h over. It is not well that there should be no penalty attached to this system of carrying on a business long after ifc has become hopelessly insolvent. We desire to say no harsh things about Mr O'Shea, but speaking with reference to the general class of su3h cases, we hold that they should be subjected to the strictest investigation. As Mr John Stuart Mill puts it, " Tohave been trusted with money or moneys worth, and to have lost or spent it, is yyrima facie evidence of something wrong; and it is not for the oreditor to prove, which ho crnnot do in one case out of ten, that there has been criminality, but for the debtor to rebut the presumption by laying open the whole state of his affairs, ana showirg either that there has been t. ■» misconduct, or that the misconduct has been of an excusable kind. If he fail in this, he ought never to be dismissed without a punishment proportioned, to the degree of blame which seems justly imputable to him ; which punishment however, might be shorten 3 or mitigated in proportion as he appeared likely to exert himself in repairing the injury done." It is to be noted that in the present case Mr O'Shea has piously remarked " that if God should please to prosper-him in his future undertakings, he would consider himself under a moral obligation to pay up his debts."