"NATURAL JUSTICE."
Ottb contemporary tells -us that -we have misunderstood- him. "We are sorry to misunderstand the argument used in any public journal on a great public question, but we really do nob see that we are in this position as regards the particular case in question. Our contemporary is opposed to the clause. He says, " Either discharge a " man finally from his debts, or only grant " a conditional discharge." "Well now, what is the 10s. clause but fulfilling the conditions of' the last few words of the extract from the Gross, viz., granting a conditional discharge. This is what it really is in effect. The insolvent who does not pay ten shillings in the pound is for the time discharged, but he is not finally discharged until he pays that amount of his debts. He has not, it is true,; his certificate suspended for six or twelve months, nor is he liable to be put iu prison by , any of liis creditors, and so be lett effectually prevented from earning anything, 1 for a time, and his family without his support. Surely, since it is now felt that imprisonment for debt' only is a great evil, the alternative of payiug ten shillings iu the pound is by no means a bad substitute. But although the Crow has latterly preached in a most eloqueiit and impressive manner against imprisonment for debt, yet we have some faint recollection of the proprietor of what was then the finest and handsomest booksellers shop in town being put iu prison for debt, his valuable stock sold at a most ruinous sacrifice,' a good business broken up, and a first-class tradesman driven to seek a living as a clerk. The late lessees of the Cross will know who caused this distress and ruin, and probably they are also acquainted with other cases of imprisonment for debt. In arguing as to the advisability of retaining such a clause in the Act, we have argued in company, as we have shown, with some of the most eminent mercantile men in London, and one at least of the men eminent for his wide knowledge of economic subjects and a distinguished member of Parliament. TVc are content to err iu such company, and in the company of those whose ideas are in entire accord with tlieirs on this subject. We are told, that we " fail to perceive in " what way the 10s. clause offers a premium "to commit fraud." "We perceived this quite well, long ago. But, legislating on the 1 law of bankruptcy as regards this particular portion of it, is, at the best, merely a choice of evils so far as the creditors are concerned. But, if a man who is compelled to pay 10s in the pound commits fraud, aud has advantages in being let free on paying that amount, surely, without this check, as at present, a person has greater scope for fraud if he continues liis career | till he can only pay say one shilling in the j pound. The 10s. clause, certainly checks the progress of a fraudulent trader very effectively, a los. clause would do this to a greater degree. On the one side is the trader who gives liis goods on credit, expecting to be paid for them, on the other is the insolvent, who cannot pay for them, and the difficult question to be solved is, how to do something like whatisjustand right, not to secure full and ample justice, but only a modicum of it under all the circumstances of the case. Objections can easily be made against any proposal to effect this object. Creditors do not like to lose their altogether; some check is felt to be imperatively necessary in England.'' To demand the payment of the entire debt by au insolvent, would be too much after the manner of Shylock ; to forego it entirely or all but entirely is just as bad. The compromise of the 10s. clause is proposed, after great consideration, and great discussion, as being a fair one as between the debtor and creditor. Doubtless there are traders, who, under such a clause, will so trim their sails that they will manage to go on trading until all but the amount required to pay half their debts is squandered or lost. They will know that they can get a final discharge if they do that, and start again as well as lie wlio paid 17s. 6d., or even 20s. in the pound. But what legislation can meet particular cases ? Acts of Parliament cannot particularise —they can only lay down general rules, and scarcely an Act on the statute book but presses unevenly somewhere. In point of fact, to say that some rogues will benefit by the clause in question, is really no argument against it; such characters live by evading laws which honest men respect. This is seen every day. "We referred before to cases in which such a clause might occasionally press very heavily on honest and upright, though unfortunate traders. Panics, causing great depreciation' of property, and shaking confidence in the commercial world, and increasing very considerably the tightness of the money market, may involve houses with large foreign connections in such a manner that no human, foresight could foretell, and such houses may be unable to pay 10 shillings in. the £1. But these are exceptional cases in England, and it is felt that, on the whole, their ca,se cannot be considered apart from that of others. Here, -then, is a way in which the clause may press very heavily on men who are merely unfortunate, _ but we repeat that there are comparatively few such among' ourselves. And we cannot see how an Act thought by the highest mercantile men in London to be absolutely necessary in England, can be so very bad in New Zealand. It has, on the whole, a balance of advantages in its favor, and that is really the question we must consider in a law of that land.
■ "With, respect to tile rest of the remarks of our contemporary, "vVe shall only say that ■sve are surprised he is so thin skinned. "\V o argued the broad question on general grounds, aud we shall, not follow him into any mere personalities. . We ltttve never said one single syllable referring to any person connected with the Cross in ve have stated about this Bankruptcy Bill; we impeach no one, but we have attempted to show that the Cross, as a public journal took the wrong side of a great and difficult public question. And as any Act of Parliament is general and not personal in its operations, the friends of the Hebat,d will be treated • under it no better, we presume, -than the friends of the Cross. We have never asked for any exemption in favor of any one. We ask for none now. And we decidedly object, as we have before' stated, to enter into any personalities with the Cross on this subject. The commercial character of the proprie-. tor of the Hebaid needß no vindication.
Ptisi; acts tire the bsst GsplEnition m tggards tliat, and the future will 1 moat probably jnot differ very materially from the past in that respect. The crystal is too thick to i'be broken by the scribe -who penned the scurrility to-which we allude. The bill 'of sale referred to ■was given as security for cash advanced, not in the way of trade,! and those curious to know its history, may learn all about it on application to Messrs. Burnside & Co. (the agents of the largest creditor of the party . who gave it), or to the party who received it. In good truth, however, we have offended the Gross, not by any little bit of banter about his curious doctrine of" natural justice," but by thoroughly exposing, as was our duty, the ignorance of the Gross upon the general subject of bankruptcy law, and of the opinions held by eminent mercantile men upon the particular point in question, ■ and also upon the inefficient and costly English Act. The Cross wrote foolishly—the oracle was shown to be not quite so wise as it pretended to be —and like an antipodean pontiff ho broached a new article of faith, and inculcated it upon his misguided dupes under the name of natural justice, at which the whole town smiled. The suggestion that we Bhould publish a list of "private " arrangement men" for the last ten, or even within the last twto years, would be, if; carried out, quite as disagreeable probably to the late lessees of the .Cross as to any other individuals, and in kindness to tliem [ we shall not at present compile and publish I such a list.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH18671001.2.13
Bibliographic details
New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1210, 1 October 1867, Page 3
Word Count
1,457"NATURAL JUSTICE." New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1210, 1 October 1867, Page 3
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries and NZME.