The Poverty Bay Herald AND East Coast News Letter. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. Friday, November 14, 1879.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume VI, Issue 950, 14 November 1879, Page 2

The Poverty Bay Herald AND East Coast News Letter. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. Friday, November 14, 1879.

The Bill introduced into the As sembly for the abolition of imprison nient for debt! has" passed* through' its second reading, and we have no doubt that with some Amendments relating to cases where fraud is evident, that it will, during the session, become one of the laws on our Statute books. Mr. Hutchinson, who introduced the measure, qould not see. how a niap, bexng pjaced m gaol would assist him to discharge his debt. v It might cause his wife and family a term or ruin, and starvation, or it might

throw them for their necessities upon some charitable institution. A simple debt was not a fraud, because when a man went to a tradesman to purchase what he might require, or it might be what he could do vei-y well without, the tradesman always had the power of refusal. He could say : "no j I will not trust you." And again, with some men, it was a crime for a man to owe them money, and if sending him to the gallows would secure the payment of a debt, they would send him. Still more" than this, there existed one law for the poor and another for thosewho were not; poor. It was never known now of a man being imprisoned fdr deot who owed £50, £60, or £100. He went through the process of being " whitewashed," without any serious consequeuoe to himsolf ; but the poor man who owed only a small sum of money, as every person who had to attend the Resident Magistrate's Courts must know had to suffer by a judgment summons. The number of these judgment summonses must be yerygreat — so great that he thought, at one time of moving for a return of the number issued thoughout the colony ; but his impression was, that there was now more imprisonment for debt than there was previous to the passing of the existing Act. At all eVents, he felt that this partial imprisonment for debt — this system whereby people who owed large sums of money were never sent to prison^— -was an injustice. Then th;erertvas, another fiction m connection with this matter, and that was this ; that these unfortunate men were sent to gaol, not because they had not paid their debts, but because they had treated the Court with contempt. Any person who had read " The Antiquary " would remember that Sir Walter Scot had a very ingenious chapter upon thab point, wherein he showed the mercy of the Scotch law. He showed.. how debtors were never sent to prison for debt, bnt His Majesty commanded a person Co pay £50 or £60, as the case might be ; and, if he did not pay it, he 1 was charged with being disloyal. But he had to go to gaol all the same; ,and:that was the case here. The object of this Bill was to abolish imprisonment for debt entirely. It had been pointed out to him there was still something wanting m this Bill. He wished to compel every person to pay who was able to pay, or to make him suffer as a criminal j but there was an omission m the Bill, which of course *would have to be rectified m Committee — there ,were no meana of recovering penalties. He was i will ing to make the nonpayment of legal penalties an. offence punishable by imprisonment. It had also been pointed out to him that possibly a debtor against whtf.ru- a judgment summons had been issued might have means that could not: be attached under the provisions of the Bill. For instance a debtor might have debts owing to him, or he might have money m the batik and the bailiff could not reach these. ir But, the present Bill ■**'• would^~-?thak€r for these there was one other objeot he had indirectly m view m this Bill, which was- not brought out very clearly, and that was, that those small debts which usually led to the issue of judgment summonses should, m point of fact, be treated as debts of honor. It was much better that a poor man should buy only as far as he could pay, and that the credit system for small sums should cease to a large extent. It was an equivocal system for the buyer as well as for the seller ; and if a 'grocer or other tradesman, knowing a man's circum- . stances, chose to give him credit, he should have to trust to the man's honor to pay. In nearly all cases a man would pay if he possibly could ; and, if he failed, the tradesman ought not to have the right- to drag him before the Court. Mr. Bareon, m speaking to the Bill, said not only did, he think the honorable gnntleman who had introduced the Bill had initiated an excellent measure, but he would like to see the honorable gentleman commit himself a little further m the direction of abolishing v legislation between debtor and creditor except m cases of ! fraud. It would tend to increase the self-respect of people if such legislation were abolished, and be a saving of money, to the State. Honorable members knew there were many engagements entered into on the Stock Exchange and on the«iurf which the law refused to enforce, and yet those engagements were honourably met. Any default was much rarer than m ordinary, commercial transactions protected by law. The provisions of the Bill appeared to meet the general approval ot the House, r and there is little doubt but what it will pass I through all its stages.