NURSING FARMER DEBTORS

Evening Post, Issue 25, 30 January 1935, Page 10

NURSING FARMER DEBTORS

Orje phase of the farmers' fight against liquidation is reported from Sydney in today's cablegrams. Seizure arid sale of fanners' produce, chattels, and properties, carried out in accordance with law, resulted in obstruction, either by refusal 6f the .farmer to surrender the goods to the official assignee (for which Mr. Justice Lukin sent James Hoban to gaol), or by combination among farmers to refuse to.bid atj sales for seized goods (an old plan, last heard of in Ireland). It would seem from the cablegram that these seizures have occurred under the ordinary process of law, and not under the special protective legisla-' tion by which the farmer debtor (if he chooses) can accept what is virtually a Government receivership, with the protection of a stay order against creditors. However, that point is not quite clear, and it is worth clearing up, for the proposed stay order legislation in New Zealand seems to be inspired by the New South Wales Act. What is there to prevent a similar revolt by farmers if the administration of the Act comes to the conclusion that a -farmer debtor's position is hopeless, and if it therefore lifts the stay order? One can conjure up many deputations to the Government. Nursing of debtors in the hope that they may meet their obligations, or alternatively reach a stage where losses can be divided with creditors, is an added complication to farming, and is hard to get rid of even when the creditor's self-interest is behind the nursing. But when the Government enters the stay order j field, when will it be able to quit?