CORRESPONDENCE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVI, Issue 43, 19 August 1908, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

BAVJJP. RE IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

TO THB EDITOn Sir, — The writer of the article in the Evening Post on tne above subject was both amusing and interesting. _ The subject of "Imprisonment for Debt" is a matter of which, as an English solicitor, I have had a large experience in its administration in the English County Courts, and consequently 1 am in a position to compare the administration 01 the law for imprisonment for debt in England with its administration in New Zealand. It should be borne in mind by any one who wishes to consider the subject in an impartial manner, that there are two classes of debtors — (1) the honest debtor ; (2) the dishonest debtor. Firstly, as to the honest debtor : When judgment is obtained against him he arranges and endeavours to pay up in accordance with his means. A plaintiff as a rule will allow him a reasonable time to do so, on finding he is willing and trying his best. Should a judgment summons be issued against him, he has the protection of the court, if he can 6how truthfully he has not had, or has not, the means to pay. This stage is, however, seldom reached in the case of an honest debtor Secondly, as to dishonest debtors : These as a rule are case-hardened and know the moves of the court and its weakness, if any, in the administration of ihe Act. They are well acquainted with tho proof required to obtain a committal order, and know what kind of evidence to give, so that no order shall be made. It is at this point that the difference between the English and the New Zealand administration varies to such a large extent. In England, when a judgment summons is issued, say, for £14, the result of tho hearing would be an order simply to pay the debt by reasonable monthly instalments, in accordance with the then proved means of the debtor, say, for example, by instalments of £1 per month. Immediately one or two instalments on such "new order" became in arrear, a second judgment summons would bo issued, and a "committal order to prison" would be made, practically as a matter of course, for example, in the following terms :—"10: — "10 days' imprisonment, or instalments of 10s per month." The judge, in making such an order, knows full well the debtor is well able to pay 10s per month, and if he refuses to pay, then he must go to prison for 10 days as for contempt in refusing 10 comply with the order of the court when he is able to do so. Tn New Zealand a committal order would be asked for, in default of paying the £14 in one lump sum. The stipendiary magistrate, on hearing the evidence, in most of the cases comes to tho conclusion that the debtor has not had the means and has not the means to pay cash down to the amount of £14, or even within a short period, say, a fortnight or a month. The consequence is, in order to get out of the difficulty and in order to exercise his jurisdiction in administering the Act as it should be administered, "no order" is made. It is tho only decision really under the circumstances which the stipendiary magistrate can arrive at. This is where the weakness in the New Zealand administration comes in. The instalment system should be adopted, even if it means increasing the staff of clerks to carry out the extra work efficiently and as it should be carried out. This should be done in the interests of the public as well as the debtors themselves. The writer of the article on the above subject asks what good is effected by sending a man to prison for debt — or rather, for contempt of court, in refusing to pay a debt which the court says' he can and must pay ? The reply to this question is, that unless a power of committal was retained in our judicature, the courts would be helpless and practically useless ii\the majority of cases, in compelling a numerous body of debt•ors to pay up. The writer of the article admits as much when he says "Some form of punishment is, of course, necessary for the recalcitrant debtors." The second reason is that practically most of the debtors committed to prison would rather pay if tho amount is for a reasonable sum, and within their power to pay, rather than go to prison. As New Zealand becomes more a commercial and industrial community, it will become absolutely necessary for the courts to adapt themselves, more and more to the English methods of enforcing payment of debts. As to protection, from distress, I agree with the writer the £25 limit is too large. Tho English limit is £5, which protects wearing apparel, tools, and implements of a man's trade, and bedding to that amount. A £10 limit would be ample. — I am, etc., WILLIAM ARNOLD. 18th August, 1908. UNWHOLESOME. To TH« EDITOB. Sir. — The article re pastrycook methods in Sydney rather tends to put on us the cloak of the Pharisee. "Thank goodness! our pastrycooks are not as the Australian pastrycooks." We don't get in our sweets the difference between putrid chick and total sum of eggs broken. Our confectioners know better, and besides, the Health Department "would not allow it." Will you allow me to dispel these illusions by the wand of absolute fact. Not long ago I purchased from a very respectable (?) establishment in this city two samples of locally made confectionery technically known as 'jam sandwich.' Said articles looked well, but on cutting them in our large diningroon* we were assailed by a most villainous odour. All noses dived for handkerchiefs while the 'jam sandwiches' beat a lightning retreat far to the rear of the dwelling. The smell was highly characteristic of eggs wel 1 advanced in years. Under pressure the vendor later on admitted that the cakes were not 'fit,' and when I threatened to trot them into the Evening Post office for inspection, if he didn't refund my cash, he paid up. That same vendor stated confidentially to a friend of his (and mine) that "the people of Wellington would eat anything provided said anything was sufficiently flavoured up." A young lady whose word I have no reason to doubt — informed me that a leading grocer with whom she was acquainted disposed of all doubtful eggs to a leading confectioner, and that the smell from said doubtful eggs was worse than awful. So much for confectionery. At another time I will forward you a little reliable detail with regard to vendors of a different class of edibles. Trusting you will publish this for the public's sake. — I am, etc., VERITAS. Wellington, 16th August, 1908. " WUSS AND WUSSER. ' 10 thb KOtrns. Sir, — Will the ''niece" of the late James Heberley kindly inform me what town and country her late uncle came from. If my surmises are right the "worser and worser" so frequently referred to is Dorset dialect. I have heard the expression, when the weather has been bad, but pronounced as "wuss and wusser." — I am, etc., DORSET. WelUugtODi 17th Augiwfci 18084