Papers Past | Parliamentary Papers | Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives | 1865 Session I | CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND...

Image
Text
Research info
Title and Usage info

D.—No. 5-

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BY COMMAND OF HIS EXCELLENCY.

WELLINGTON: 1865.

D.—No. 5

No. 1. The Chief Justice to the Colonial Secretary. Sib, — Supreme Court, Auckland, sth October, 1863. Before leaving Auckland for Wellington I have felt it my duty to make two orders of Court under the 38th, 39tb, and 40th sections of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862. I have made these orders because I have been in constant communication with Mr. Anderton, in whose favor one of them is made, have witnessed his conduct of the business in the Insolvent department of the Supreme Court, and feel that if anything occurred to prevent my return my successor would not be competent to estimate the nature and value of the services rendered by Mr. Anderton. The order for payment of money to Mr. Anderton is based upon a calculation of eight per cent, upon the gross amount of tbe moneys recovered and received from the estate of one insolvent, this being the only estate which will have been wound up at the time when this order is presented. Mr. Anderton will forward for your information the balance sheet of this account and also copies of the schedules of other insolvent estates from which he has been receiving proofs and collecting debts, but which are not yet wound up. From thesa you will learn that the single estate (Parker's) upon which the 8 per cent, is calculated, is an estate which has not merely paid twenty shillings in the pound and all costs and expenses incurred in winding up, but leaves a considerable balance payable to the so called insolvent. The other estates, the winding up of which will be attended with great trouble, are likely to yield in some instances nil, and in others next to noihing on which any per centage can be calculated. Mr. Anderton has acted in all the several capacities described in the 38th Section, except that of Mercantile Assessor, and it is quite clear that in the long ruu such a per centage will not remunerate any professional man discharging the like duties. The Insolvent Estates Fund can never exceed five per cent, on the moneys received. I have the honor, &c, The Honorable the Colonial Secretary, George Alfred Arney, (Judicial Department), Auckland. Chief Justice. No. 2. Circular. Sir, — Attorney General's Office, Auckland, January 14th, 1864. - Having been led to believe that serious defects exist in the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, I have the honor to request that your honor will be good enough from time to time to favor me with the results of your experience in the working of the Act, so that material may be collected for its amendment by legislation in the next Session of the General Assembly. I have, &c, His Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Chief Justice, Auckland. Fred. Whitaker. One of the same tenor and date to — His Honor Mr. Justice Johnston, Wellington. „ „ Gresson, Christchurch. „ „ Richmond, Dunedin. No. 3. Mr. Justice Johnston to the Hon. the Attorney-General. Sir, — Judge's Chambers, Wellington, 21st January, 1864. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 14th January, calling my attention to the defects existing in the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, and requesting me from lime to time to inform you of the results of my experience in the working of the act, with a view of collecting materials for its amendment. I shall have much pleasure in complying with your request, but I think my observations will be more useful if I merely make notes at present and furnish you with reports at a later period. I take the liberty of expressing my satisfaction at the course you have adopted for remedying the crying evils caused by the crudeness of the recent Act, and I have, &c, To the Honorable the Attorney General, Auckland. Alexander J. Johnston. No. 4. Mr. Justice Gresson to the Hon. the Attorney General. Sir, — Christchurch, Judge's Chambers, 29th March, 1864. I have the honor to acknowledge your letter of the 14th January last, in which!you request me to furnish you with the results of my experience in the working of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, with a view to its being amended in the next Session of the General Assembly.

No. IP.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862.".

D.—No. 5

I deferred answering your letter until the business of the Session had been disposed of, believing that no inconvenience would result from the delay. It appears to me that the greatest defect in the Act is the want of a vesting order, or some other simple and inexpensive mode of vesting the property of the Debtor in Trustees for the Creditors. Most of the difficulties that occur in working the Act are traceable to the slow and cumbrous machinery provided for this purpose. It ofteu happens tbat the assets are small and of so doubtful a character, that it is not worth while to assign them, in which case either much expense is incurred to no purpose, or no relief is afforded to the Debtor, whose embarrassments may have been caused by his misfortunes rather than misconduct. In many of the cases that have been before me, there was so little to be gained by the sequestrator's taking possession, that the unavoidable expense consequent on his doing so would have exceeded any advantage to be gained thereby, and the order of sequestration has therefore proved inoperative. If there were some officer provided by the Act, in whom all the Insolvent Estates were at onca vested, this difficulty would be removed, and questions that now arise between judgment Creditors claiming against, and other persons claiming under the order of sequestration (section 17) would be avoided. The Act (section 18) provides for tbe protection from arrest of the Debtor, if he be at large at tbe time of making tbe order. But it seems to me at least doubtful, whether it enables the Court to extend protection to a Debtor from an arrest made before the order. It seems hardly consistent with the large discretionary powers given by the Act to the Court to withhold the power of protecting a Debtor who may be kept in custody by a Creditor from vindictive or other unjustifiable motives. Again, no provision is made for Creditors residing at a distance, nor for enabling the Trustees to elect as to taking leaseholds, nor for allowing payment in full of wages due to servants, nor for allowance of any sum to Insolvent Debtor while before the Court, if it be expedient to sanction such allowance, nor for prosecuting to conviction a Debtor who may have committed a misdemeanour within the meaning of the 42nd Section. The foregoing observations indicate some of the difficulties that have occurred to me in working the Act; others, doubtless, have escaped my memory, but the experience of my learned brethren will supply the omissions of this crude and incomplete sketch. I have, &c, The Hon. the Attorney-General, &c, &c, &c. H. B. Gresson. No. 5. The Hon. the Attorney-General to Mr. Justice Gresson. _ Sin. — Attorney-General's Office, Auckland, May 4th, 1864. i. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin, relative to the difficulties that have occurred in the working of the Debtors and Creditors Act J 862, and to return your Honor the thanks of the Government for your observations. They will be taken into consideration along with those of the other Judges, when the Bills for the next Session of the General Assembly are being prepared. I have, &c, His Honor Mr. Justice Gresson, Christchurch. Fredk. Whitaker. No. 6. Circular. Sir, — Attorney General's Office, Auckland, 20th January, 1865. The attention of the Government has been directed to the subject of the law relating to debtors and creditors, and in particular to the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, iv the working of which many defects have been found. Tbe Government will be prepared in the next session of the Assembly to propose a measure for amending the law. With this object in view I have to request tbe favor of your opinion and suggestions on the following points:— 1. As to the present constitution of the Insolvency Court, whether it is expedient to constitute one Court for the whole Colony instead of District Courts, and in that case what provision should be made for enabling the jurisdiction of the Court to be exercised in the provinces. 2. Whether it is desirable to separate the jurisdiction from that of the Supreme Court. 3. Whether in cases below a certain value, the courts of Resident Magistrates should have summary jurisdiction, at all events to the extent of allowing them to discharge prisoners in custody for small debis and upon what terms. 4. As to the proceedings of the Court, how they can be simplified and rendered less expensive. 5. As to the vesting of the Debtor's Estate, whether a vesting order should be substituted for the present ad interim sequestration and assignment. 6. Whether the present mode of appointing trustees or assignees can be improved, and in particular whether official trustees or assignees should be appointed, and what should be their powers and duties. 7. How to ensure the speedy and just administration of the Debtor's Estate, and to diminish the cost attending it.

Xo. SB. k>!itli March, 1564.

No, 8.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

8. As to the custody of the estate and particularly of money arising from the proceeds thereof, whether provision ought not to be made, for lodging all such monies in a public account in some bank, to be under tbe direction of tbe Court. 9. Whether more stringent provision should be made for the punishment of debtors in cases of improvidence or fraud, and for preventing the relief of Insolvent Debtors from being turned to abuse, and what should be the nature of such provision. 10. Whether any alteration should be made in the law as regards Composition or Trust Deeds, and whether greater facilities should be given for winding up estates under private arrangements. 11 Generally what improvemeirs in the law relating to Debtors and Creditors you would suggest. Requesting the favor of an early reply, I have, &c, Henry Seweix. The foregoing Circular was addressed to— His Honor Sir G. A. Arney. Chief Justice. F. W. Merriman, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. His Honor Mr. Justice Johnson, Wellington. Thos. Standish, Esq., Solicitor, New Plymouth. His Honor Mr. Justice Gresson. Christchurch. C. B. Izard, Esq., Solicitor, Wellington. His Honor Mr. Justice Richmond, Dunedin. Hugh Ross, Esq., Solicitor, Wanganui. His Honor Mr. Justice Chapman, Dunedin. J. N. Wilson, Esq., Napier. Thomas Beckham, Esq., J.P., Resident Magis- Henry Adams, Esq., Nelson. .rate, Auckland. F. S. Duncan, Esq., Solicitor, Canterbury. Josiah Thight, Esq , J.P., Resident Magistrate, James Howorth, Esq , Dunedin. New Plymouth. S. M. Macdonald, Esq., Solicitor, Southland. CD. R.Ward, Esq.. J.P., Resident Magistrate, F. Whitaker, Esq , Solicitor, Auckland. Wellington. S. Jackson, Elsq., Solicitor, Auckland. John Poynter, Eisq.. J.P., Resident Magistrate, T.Russell, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. Nelson A. Beveridge, Esq., Solicitor. Auckland. S. L. Muller, Esq., J.P., Resident Magistrate, H. Hill, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. Blenheim. R. W. Wynn, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. C. Bowen, Esq.. J P., Resident Magistrate, James Russell, Esq„ Solicitor, Auckland. Christchurch. E. J. Anderton, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. William Donald, Esq., J.P., Resident Magis- F. M. P. Brookfield, Solicitor, Auckland. trate, Lyttelton. E. J. Cox, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. B. Woolcombe, Esq., J.P., Resident Magistrate, S. E. Hughes, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. Timaru J. B. Russell, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. A. R. C. Strode, Esq., J.P., Resident Magistrate, G. S. Keetley, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. Dunedin. J. B. Davey, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. Wilson Gray, Esq., J.P., Resident Magistrate, J. Cumin, Esq., Barrister-at-law, Auckland. District Judge. J. H. Crawford, Esq., Solicitor, Auckland. F. A. Mansford, Esq., J. P., Resident Magistrate, W. Halse, Esq., Solicitor, New Plymouth. Port Chalmers. A. de B. Brandon, Esq., Solcitor, Wellington. H. McCulloch, Esq., J.P., Resident Magistrate, C. B. Borlase, Esq , Solicitor, Wellington. Invercargill. W Jeffrey, Esq., Solicitor, Marlborough. R. H. Forman. Esq., J.P., Dunedin. J. S. Williams, Esq., Solicitor, Christchurch. The Sheriff, Mathew Price, Esq., Invercargill. T. B. Gillies, Esq., Solicitor, Dunedin. The Sheriff, Alexander Bach, Esq., Christ- — Kennyon, Esq., Solicitor, Dunedin. church. — Prendergast, Esq., Solicitor, Dunedin. The Sheriff, Marlborough. — Harvey, Esq., Solicitor, Invercargill. The Sheriff Nelson. The Secretary Chamber of Commerce, AuckThe Sheriff, Auckland. land. The Registrar Supreme Court, Auckland. The Secretary Chamber of Commerce, WelThe Registrar Supreme Court, New Plymouth. lington. The Registrar Supreme Court, Wellington. The Secretary Chamber of Commerce, Nelson. The Deputy Registrar Supreme Court, Napier. The Secretary Chamber of Commerce, CanterThe Registrar Supreme Court, Nelson. bury. The Registrar Supreme Court, Canterbury. The Secretary Chamber of Commerce, DunThe Registrar Supreme Court, Otago. edin. The Registrar Supreme Court, Southland. No. 7. Mr. Justice Chapman to the Attorney General. Sir,— Dunedin, 4th Feb. 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your printed circular dated Auckland, 20th January 1865, on the subject of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, and I propose with as little delay as possible to give to the subject my careful consideration, and transmit to you the best answers in my power to the several questions submitted to me. I may possibly find it necessary to subdivide my answers into more than one report. I am, Sir, Your obedient Servant, The Hon. Henry Sewell, M.L.C., &c, &c, &c, Wellington. H. S. Chapman.

" DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

No. 8. The Secretary of the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce, Christchurch, to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Canterbury Chamber of Commerce, Christchurch, February 6, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of a circular letter requesting the opinion of this Chamber upon the general working of the Debtors aud Creditors Act. It has been submitted to the especial consideration of a Sub-Committee appointed for the purpose, and as soon as their report is furnished I shall have the honor to forward it to you. I have, &c, J. M. Wheeler, The Hon. Henry Sewell. Secretary. No. 9. The Resident Magistrate, Port Chalmers, to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Resident Magistrate's Court, Port Chalmers, 7th February, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your Circular, No. 8, dated 20th January, 1865, having reference to the amendment of the existing law of Debtors and Creditors, and beg respectfully to reply to tbe various queries seriatim. 1. I consider the present constitution of the Insolvency Court bad, and having due regard to the Constitution Act, and the peculiar circumstances of the Colony, would, as closely as possible, assimilate its Bankruptcy aud Insolvency law to that of England, and would recommend that each Province should possess one or more Judge or Judges, as may be found necessary, who should exercise powers similar to those of the Judges of the County Courts in England. Taking the Province of Otago as an illustration of how the duties should be performed, I would let the Judge hold a Court once a week in Dunedin at which (inasmuch as Dunedin possesses the only Debtors' gaol in the province) all debtors confined in gaol could, after having remained in confinement such time as may be provided by the contemplated new statute, and having given due notice by advertisement and otherwise to their creditors, apply for relief at the same Court. Debtors not in custody might file their petitions for protection. The same Judge might hold monthly, fortnightly, or weekly Courts in the principal towns of the province, and would in this way find his time pretty fully occupied. 2. Most decidedly, except as a Court of Appeal from the Provincial Judges. 3. I should not like to see Resident Magistrates in any case possess the power of discharging debtors from custody. 4. My reply to No.] applies to this. I approve generally of clause 6of the Debtors and Creditors Act, 1862, except that I would allow no creditor or creditors to petition till the debtor had been in custody fourteen days instead of three. In all cases the Judge should have power to examine a debtor relative to the truth of the petition and schedule, and make such order as he might think fit. In the case of debtors confined in gaol, no creditor should be allowed to oppose without having previously given a reasonable notice to the debtor of his intention so to do, with the grounds of such opposition. Where a debtor is not in custody, or where the creditor petitions, opposition should be allowed without notice. The grounds of opposition might be limited to the offences mentioned in the 42nd section of the Debtors and Creditors Act, 1862, omitting such only as the proposed alteration in the law would render obsolete. 5. &6. On filing the petition I think a more preferable plan to the present would be for the Judge to make an order vesting all the Debtor's real and personal estate in the Clerk or Registrar of the Court, who should act as Official Assignee till such time as assignees were chosen by the creditors, when his powers mi»ht cease, or he might continue to act jointly with the creditor's assignee. 7. & 8. It would be necessary that a messenger or some such officer shall be attached to each Court, who, upon receiving an order to that effect from the Judge, might possess the power of selling all or any portion of the Debtor's property by auction. This would be a speedy and inexpensive method. The proceeds arisin" from the sale should be forthwith paid into the Bank to an account to be opened in the name of the Registrar, and to be administered in such way as the Judge on the application of the assignees may order. 9. I consider the present powers sufficiently ample. 10. Sections 19, 20, and subseqisent ones of the present Act, appear to me to provide every facility for the winding up of the estates under private arrangement. 11. The answers to the queries are of necessity hurried and imperfect, and do not go into details, but they comprise in the main, my views of the Insolvency Law, in which for many years past I have taken considerable interest. The Judges of tbe Court should, where practicable, be members of the legal profession. The District Courts, which corresponded very much to the County Courts in England, might with some modifications have been made available, but this abolishment in most districts occasions a difficuly as to the manner in which Insolvency Law should be dispensed, except by the machinery previously mentioned. It would not, I think, be right for debtors or creditors, that Resident Magistrates should possess the necessary powers, but at the same time there will not be many to dispute the desirability of separating the Insolvency jurisdiction from the Supreme Court, except as a Court of Appeal. I believe the system which I have mentioned would be more than self-supporting. I respectfully offer these suggestions, and shall be pleased to find that I have rendered even the smallest assistance to the Government in carrying out a necessary and requisite alteration in the law. I have, &c, F. A. Mansford, The Honorable the Attorney-General. Resident Magistrate.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.-No.._

No. 10. The Attorney-General to the Resident Magistrate, Port Chalmers. Sib Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 28th February, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin, and 7th Feb., im;.. am directed to thank you for the same. I have, &c, R. G. Fountain, Tiie Resident Magistrate, Port Chalmers. For the Asst. Law Officer. No. 11. The Sheriff, Canterbury, to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Sheriff's Office, Christchurch, Canterbury, February 17th, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge tbe receipt of your circular letter of the date and number quoted Noin the margin. 20th Jun., lM;r. I feel myself incompetent to form an opinion on any part of the present Debtors and Creditors Act, except those which have special reference to the duties of Receiver. The first t.venty Insolvent Estates in Canterbury under the present Act were held by me as Receiver. Of these, tbe assets of them only were sufficient to pay the expenses of taking actual possession required under the latter part of the Seventeenth Clause of the Act. In the first of these cases the holding possession of goods to the amount of £442 6s. 9d. cost £34 ss. 6d. In the second case the receiver could not take possession of the goods as another person had a lien over them which the Execution Creditor paid off, issued a writ, and sold. In the third case, at the suggestion of the Solicitor the debtor was allowed to hold possession as bailiff till the sale, on account of the comparatively large expenses of holding possession otherwise. I should therefore suggest that the property in the goods should at once pass to the receiver without his being required to take actual possession. That he be impowered at once to sell and pay the money into Court to the credit of the particular estate. I have, &c, Alexander Buck, The Hon. the Altomey General. Sheriff. No. 12. R. G. Fountain to the Sheriff, Canterbury. g IR Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 24th February, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin, and 17 th Feb., 1860. am directed in reply to convey to you the thanks of the Attorney-General for the same. I have, &c. R. G. Fountain, The Sheriff, Christchurch. For the Assistant Law Officer. No. 13. Mr. Saul Charles Philips to the Attorney-General. Honorable Sir, — Wakefield Street, Auckland, N.Z., February 17th, 1865. I intended to address a few lines to you respecting the Insolvent Act previous to your leaving Auckland, but supposing you had sufficient business on your hands I ventured to wait a better opportunity. You may please to recollect when I returned to you the present Act, I stated that it was impossible that the Act could work or act properly ; time and the merchants of this City have proved that fact. This is no disparagement to the gentlemen who drafted the Bill, as it wants a peculiar knowledge of men to com. pose such an act. As proof, they have been for this last hundred years in London endeavouring to make a complete act so as to meet the intricacies of debtor and creditor, and have not succeeded. It wants a man who thoroughly understands mercantile and retail business, and who thoroughly understands the modes that debtors assume, and tbe chicanery then adopted by them. The present Act is faulty almost in every respect, and in one case really amounts to a denial of justice to the debtor. We will suppose Zan insolvent, is heard on his petition; the judge considers there has been fraud in procuring credit, dismisses the petition; a creditor summonses him betore the Resident Magistrate; Z, the insolvent, is commi ted for trial, but out on bail; the Supreme Court sits, the man is placed before the same judge, who has already proclaimed that he thought that he had committed fraud. What does the insolvent's advocate say ? He must request the juoge to alter his former opinions, or, in addressing the jury, he must require them to divest themselves of what the judge might say, the judge having before in a measure convicted him. This ought not to be. In no part of the United Kingdom or any of her Majesty's territories is such a thing known as a Chief Justice, who is supposed to represent her Majesty, sitting in Insolvency. I should not have presumed to address you so early, but seeing you have addressed the Chamber of Commerce on the subject, I have to apologise, and hops you will not consider me intrusive. 1 will now presume to answer, to the best of my knowledge and experience, the questions you have transmitted, and venture to hope that

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

it will be of some advantage to your intended improved Bill; and for convenience I have placed the answers on a separate sheet. You have not stated if the Court is to go Circuit, in tbat case some alterations may be necessary and advantageously made. I have, &c, To Henry Sewell, Esq., Attorney General. Saul Charles Philips. Questioq Ist, —As to the present constitution of the Court. The Court should consist of a Commissioner of Insolvency and not a Judge, one Commissioner's Clerk who in the early practice of the Court could act as Registrar, one Official Assignee, and one Official Assignee's Clerk, one Principal Messenger, and liberty to employ extra messengers, and one Crier to the Court. Question 2nd, —Whether it would be desirable to separate the Jurisdiction from that of the Supreme Court. Most certainly, very few gentlemen well learned in the Law (and may be very clever), still they are not always conversant with Insolvency. The Commissioner and the Official Assignee ought to be men a full knowledge of Mercantile and Retail trade. Question 3rd,—Whether in cases below a certain value the Courts of Resident Magistrates should have summary jurisdiction, &c, &c. This was not found to answer in England, but a prisoner for debt was allowed to be brought up (if in confinement) before the Resident Magistrate, and on giving bail, he having previously petitioned the Court, was let out of prison by being bailed for double the amount of his detainer. Question 4th, —As to the proceedings of the Court, __c, __c. The Court to sit every six weeks with the officers named, and arrangements made for the final settlement of each Insolvent's Estate before the ensuing Court day. Question sth, —As to vesting the Debtor's Estate, &c. The Insolvent in filing his Schedule with a statement of all he possesses for the benefit of his Creditors and all his expectancies in his own right, or in the right of his wife, should at the same time execute a Power of Attorney, and such Trade Assignee as may be chosen by the Creditors or appointed by the Court. Question 6th, —As to the mode of appointing Trustees. There will be no necessity for Trustees, the property of the Insolvent being on his filing his petition at once transferred to the Official Assignee. The Official Assignee, and the Trade Assignee having turned all the Assets of the Insolvent into cash to make immediate distribution under the sanction of the Commissioner of the Court. Question 7th.—To ensure speedy and just administration of effects. The Assignees having possession can proceed to immediate sales, and the Official Assignee having power to collect debts can proceed almost immediately to a distribution. There will be little expense attached, as it is presumed the fees will be trifling. Question Btb.—As to the custody of the Estate of Insolvent and money arising from proceeds, &c., &c. The Estate being vested in the Court, the Official and Trade Assignee, all moneys received until the distribution to be placed into a Bank to be appointed by the Court, with the approbation of the Chief Justice. Separate accounts of each insolvent's estate to be kept. Question 9th.—Restringent provisions. It is impossible to enact laws to meet every case that comes before the Court, many provisions for punishment are orders of Court. Discharge from debts can be refused with or without protection if fraud or improvidence or reckless dealings are proved, whether the future property of such insolvents can be made hereafter available to pay their debts or they can be discharged conditionally. Question 10th.—Alteration in law as regards Trust Deeds under private arrangements. There will scarcely be any Trust Deeds necessary, the Official Assignee having possession of all the Insolvent's property. But upon the second meeting of creditors, if arrangements can be made, approved by the Official Assignee, and under the sanction of the Court, private arrangements can be made. ln England the Courts for the Recovery of Debts under fifty pounds take cognisance of insolvents under two hundred and fifty pounds. It was tried, I believe, to extend it to five hundred pounds, but did not succeed, as it was found that the expenses were nearly as much as going through the regular Courts. The Officers of this Court while holding office to be sworn in as special constables, particularly the messenger and assistants. No. 14. Mr. R. G. Fountain to S. C. Philips, Esq., Auckland. Sic, — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 24th February, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin. I have, &c, R. G. Fountain, S. C. Philips, Esq., Auckland. For the Assistant Law Officer. No. 15. S. L. Muller, Esq., to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Resident Magistrate's Office, Blenheim, 9th March, 1865. In reply to your circular letter requesting my opinion upon certain questions relating to the Debtors and Creditors Act, I have the honor to transmit to you my answer upon the subject. I have, &c, L. S. Muller, The Hon. the Attorney-General, Wellington. Resident Magistrate.

17thFeb.l865.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.— Ho. 5

Replies to queries in answer to a circular letter from the Honorable the Attorney-General on the subject of the Debtors and Creditors Act. 1. As to the present constitution of the Insolvency Court, whether it is expedient to constitute one Court for the whole Colony instead of district Courts, and in that case what provision should be made for enabling the jurisdiction of the Court to be exercised in the provinces ? I consider that one Court for the whole Colony would entail great inconvenience and hardship ; I would suggest that aCourt should be held in every Province where a sitting of the Supreme Court takes place. 2. Whether it is desirable to separate the jurisdiction from that of the Supreme Court ? lam in favor of continuing, for the present, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; I think the expenses of a separate Court would more than counterbalance its utility. 3. Whether in cases below a certain value the courts of Resident Magistrates should have summary jurisdiction, at all events to the extent of allowing them to discharge prisoners in custody for small debts, and upon what terms? I consider in cases in which the amount of debts do not exceed, say, five hundred pounds (£500), Resident Magistrates' Courts should have jurisdiction. One Resident Magistrate's Court in each province would be sufficient. No Resident Magistrate, unless he be a Solicitor or Barrister, should exercise such powers unless he have performed the duties of Resident Magistrate for not less than five years. 4. As to the proceedings of the Court, how they can be simplified aud rendered less expensive? By the alterations suggested in these replies, I think the expenses and proceedings might be considerably shortened. 5. As to the vesting of the debtor's estate, whether a vesting order should be substituted for the present ad interim sequestration and assignment ? I would prefer a vesting order; the ad interim sequestration seems open to the objection that the insolvent's property is not secure unless the assignee has taken actual. possession of the property. This, in a country where property often consists of horses and cattle running at large, is a matter of time and difficulty. As soon as a vesting order is obtained it should be published in a Gazette and in one newspaper having circulation within the Province. 6. Whether the present mode of appointing trustees or assignees can be improved, and in what particular, whether official trustees or assignees should be appointed, and what should be their powers and duties? I think an official assignee should be appointed, to whom the vesting order should be given :in the case of the Supreme Court tbe chief clerk should be appointed. Trustees should be appointed at a meetin» of creditors, whose duties should be to realize the bankrupt's estate in manner most conducive to the interests of the creditors: should the creditors fail to appoint trustees, the official assignee to wind up the estate. 7. How to ensure the speedy and just administration of the debtor's estate, aDd to diminish the cost attending it ? The official assignee should exercise a supervision over the trustees appointed by the creditors; and, in the event of their neglect of duty, as not using proper despatch in realising the estate; upon proof to the Court of such fault, the Court should order the official assignee to realize. 8. As to the custody of the estate, and particularly of money arising from the proceeds thereof, whether provision ought not to be made for lodging all such monies in a public account in some Bank, to be under the direction of the Court ? The custody of the estate should vest in the official assignee, and all money arising from the proceeds thereof should be lodged in a Bank in the name of the official assignee, such assignee to give security to the satisfaction of the Court. 9. Whether more stringent provision should be made for the punishment of debtors in cases of improvidence or fraud, and for preventing the relief of insolvent debtors from being turned to abuse, and what should be the nature of such provision ? For offences under the 41st section of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, I would suggest that the period of imprisonment be extended to a period not exceeding two years; and with regard to offences under section 42 of the said Act, that the Court should have the power of Justices of the Peace under Jervis Acts to commit for trial. This power is given to Judges in bankruptcy under section 222 of the Bankrupt Act 1801 of the Imperial Parliament. 10. Whether any alteration should be made in the law as regards composition or trust deeds, and whether greater facilities should be given for winding up estates under private arrangements? In cases where an actual majority of creditors, representing fths of the amount of the debts of the bankiupt, give their consent in writing, a deed of arrangement might be entered into, and such instrument should be binding upon the rest of the creditors; such deed to protect the person ol the debtor. 11. Generally, what improvements in the law relating to Debtors and Creditors you would suggest ? In the event of a debtor absconding, on petition of a creditor, a visiting order should be given to the official assignee, who should call upon all creditors to come, within a limited time, and prove their debts. Salaries and wages of clerks and servants, for a period not exceeding three months, should be paid in full; beyond three months, they should share as other creditors. S. L. Muller, Resident Magistrate, Blenheim. No. 16. 018o IB Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 16th March, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin and am directed in reply to thank you for the same. I have, &c, R. G. Fountain, The Resident Magistrate, Blenheim. For the Assist. Law Officer.

9th March, 1805.

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

No. 17. Wm. Fisher, Esquire, Christchurch, to the Attorney-General. Sir,— Christchurch, March 10th, 1865. You will possibly remember that last year, when you were in Christchurch, I mentioned to you that 1 had drawn a " proposed new Debtors and Creditors Act" founded on my long experience in the practice of bankruptcy aud insolvency in England. This proposed Act has been perused by Mr. Slater, who will tell you he approves it. Mr. Moorhouse, Mr. Cotterell, and other solicitors here, have also perused it, and approve it. I have recently carefully revised it, and now (with the sanction of Mr. Slater) submit it for your perusal, and, if you think fit, adoption. Any information or explanation you may require shall be promptly afforded by me if you think fit to favour me with a line, and any further assistance in the matter that I can render may be depended on. With regard to the appointment of a judge, or commissioner specially for the purpose, it appears to be the general feeling in Christchurch that the business of the Supreme Court interferes materially with that of Bankruptcy. For instance, the hearings are only once in three months, which is very prejudicial to the interests of both creditors and debtors. It has also been suggested that a Small Debtors' Court, on the principle of the County Courts in England, will be a great improvement ou the present system of the Resident Magistrate's Court. This might easily be arranged to be under the jurisdiction of the Judge appointed under the Debtors and Creditors Act, and the remuneration to be from the fees payable for summonses and hearings, on the same self-supporting system as that suggested in my proposed Debtors and Creditors Act. Should you think well of this suggestion, I shall be happy to commit my ideas of a short bill, for a Small Debtors' Court to paper, and send you. I have, dec, The Honorable the Atttorney-General. William Fisher. No. 18. The Attorney-General to William Fisher, Esq., Christchurch. Sir. — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 17th March, 1805. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in tho margin, and am directed, in reply, to thank you for the same. I have, &c, R. G. Fountain, William Fisher, Esq., Christchurch. For the Assist. Law Officer. No. 19. William Fisher, Esquire, Christchurch to the Atiorney-General. Re Debtors and Creditors Act. Sir, — Christchurch, April, 15th, 1865. It being now apparent that whatever measure may be adopted in this matter, official assignees must be appointed in the different districts. I think the time has- arrived for making known to you my wish to become a candidate for that office in this district. Long experience as accountant in bankruptcy and insolvency in London, which I think will be evident on perusal of the proposed Act, I had the honor to send you, is my pea for the application. The majority of the solicitors here will, I know, join in testifying to my fitness for the office I seek, and I doubt not that such testimony will be numerously backed by several of tbe principal merchants and others here. If successful, I shall be ready to find the needful security. I ha.c, &c, The Honorable tbe Attorney-General William E_sher. No. 20. The Attorney-General to Wm. Fisher, Esquire, Christchurch. Sir, — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 18th April, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin. I have, &c, R. G. Fountain, William Fisher, Esquire, Solicitor, Christchurch. For the Assist. Law Officer. No. 21. - Sir, — Colonial Secretary's Office, Wellington, Ist March, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the number and date quoted in tbe margin, and in reply to inform your Honor that the Debtors and Creditors Act is under the consideration of the Government with a view to its amendment next session. 1 have, __c., His Honor the Superintendent, Otago. Fred. A. Weld.

March 10th, 1665,

April ... 1-65,

No. _-o.>. 3 15th Feb., 1865.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

No. 22. Province of Otago, New Zealand, Sir, — Superintendent's Office, Dunedin, 10th March, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the number and date quoted in the margin, informing me that the Debtors and Creditors Act is under the consideration of the Government with a view to its amendment next session. I have, <fee, J. Hyde Harris, The Hon. the Colonial Secretary, Wellington. Superintendent. No. 23. Province of Otago, New Zealand, Sir, — Superintendent's Office, Dunedin, 15th Feb., 1865. I do myself the honor to invite the consideration of the General Government to the very considerable expense entailed on this province, owing to the inadequate provision made by the " Debtors and Creditors Act 1862," for the maintenance of debtors, see section 35, which fixes the amount to be paid by a detaining creditor at the rate of five shillings per week, The actual cost of the ration supplied to a debtor in Dunedin gaol is seven shillings and sevenpence per week, while in the country gaols it ranges as high as twenty-eight shillings, in addition to the cost of supervision and providing the necessary accommodation. It appears to me that, in common fairness, when a debtor is incarcerated, the actual expense of his maintenance should fall on those at whose suit he is detained ; and I therefore, on behalf of this Government, have the honor to suggest that an amendment to the existing law may be introduced at the next session of the General Assembly with that object. I have, &c, J. Hyde Harris, The Hon. the Colonial Secretary, Auckland. Superintendent. No. 24. Robert Chapman, Esq , Dunedin, to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Supreme Court Office, Dunedin, 17th March, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your printed circular, of date 20th January last, requesting my opinion and suggestions on certain points relative to the proposed introduction of an amendment on the " Debtors and Creditors Act 1862," and have now the honor to send enclosed what you have so required. My experience is founded on the working of the present Act in many hundred cases brought before this Court." I have, &c, Robert Chapman, The Honorable the Attorney-General, Wellington. Registrar. Opinions and suggestions by the Registrar of the Supreme Court at Otago as to amendments of the " Debtors and Creditors Act 1862," prepared in reply to Circular of 20th January, 1865. Queries — 1. I would not suggest any alteration in the constitution of the Court. 2. I do not think it desirable to separate tbe jurisdiction from that of the Supreme Court. 3. I would not advise giving jurisdiction to Resident Magistrates in any description of cases, not even to the extent of allowing them to discharge prisoners in custody for small debts. The Supreme Court is capable of accomplishing what is proposed by this query. 4. By the adoption of the suggestions in reply to other queries, and more particularly to query 11, the object sought to be obtained by this query will in a great measure be accomplished. 5. On presentment of the insolvent's petition, or the petition of a creditor or creditors, as the case may be, an order should be made vesting the insolvent's estate in one of certain official assignees who shall give bond with two sufficient sureties in the amount of the assets in the estate. 6. I would recommend that the appointment of trustees, as by section 10 of the present act, should not be provided for in a new act. The official assignees should have power to realise the estate, pay preferable claims, and prepare a scheme of division of the estate; upon the footing of which, on approval of the court or a judge, the assets should be distributed. 7. Tbe recommendations in previous answers will effect the object contemplated by the query. 8. The custody of the estate would, according to previous suggestions, be in the official assignee. All monies realized should be forthwith paid into Court, or into an account in the name of the estate in the Bank of New Zealand, or into the Colonial Treasury; no part of which monies to be paid out except upon order of the Court or a Judge. 9. I would suggest that fraudulent insolvents should, aloug with imprisonment, as provided by the present act, have hard labour. 10. I would leave the law as it is on these points. 11. Generally, I would suggest that the debtor should be present at the first hearing for examination by the Court or the creditors ; and if the conduct of the insolvent should appear unimpeachable, he may then and there obtain his final order of discharge, or be otherwise dealt with, if it should appear that his conduct has been characterised by fraud. The Court or a Judge may grant ad interim protection, or order discharge of insolvent from prison. The provisions of the act as to mercantile assessors might be left out in the new act. They appear unnecessary, and have not hitherto been taken advantage of in Ibis Province. The provisions for meetings of creditors may not be continued in the new act, as creditors do not attend in one out of twenty cases. Often one creditor may attend and propose himself as assignee, I would further recommend that the power of delegation provided by the act should be retainod.

No. sa.

Ist .March, 1 Mi

No 4202.

(N0...)

(No. _.)

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

No. 25. R. G. Fountain to the Registrar of the Supreme Court, Dunedin. Sir, — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 24th March, 1865. I have tbe honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin, and am directed in reply to thank you for the same. 1 have, &c., R. G. Fountain, The Registrar Supreme Court, Dunedin. For the Assistant Law Officer. No. 26. Charles A. C. Beardswith, deceased. Eva David, deceased. Bib,— Supreme Court Office, New Plymouth, 28th March, 1865. In compliance with your circular letter of the 14th ult., I have the honor to inform you that I have paid over to the Sub-Treasurer tbe balance in my hands to the credit of the above estates. I have, (fee, Edward S. Willcock, The Hon. the Attorney-General, Wellington. Registrar. No. 27. John Wheeler, Esq., Christchurch, to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Christchurch, New Zealand, March 29, 1865. Enclosed I have the honor to hand you a report of the sub-committee appointed by the Chamber some time back, on the Debtors and Creditors Act of 1862, which has taken the form of a categorical reply to the questions proposed by you in your circular letter, the receipt of which I had the honor to acknowledge on the Oth ultimo. The report was fully discussed and accepted at a general meeting of the Chamber held on the 28th instant for the purpose. I have, &c, John Wheeler, The Hon. the Attorney-General. Secretary. The members of the sub- committee, appointed to consider the Debtors and Creditors Act of 1862, report — That their attention has been directed mainly to the queries proposed by the Honorable the AttorneyGeneral, in his letter to the Chamber of 20th January, and, in reply thereto, they do not think it would be prudent to attempt amending the present Act, but prefer its repeal, and the enactment of a new ordinance. In reply to tbe enquiries of the Honorable the Attorney-General— 1. and 2. They suggest the establishment of District Courts, presided over by Commissioners, with due provision for appeal to Judges of tbe Supreme Court against decisions of the Commissioners. 3. They are of opinion that it would not be prudent to confer on the Resident Magistrates, powers of summary jurisdiction in matters relating to insolvency, even in small cases. They would suggest that, on the filing of an insolvency petition, the Commissioners should issue a warrant for the release of any prisoners retained in custody on account of debt. 4, 5, and 6. Tbe Committee think that much of the expense and vexatious delay arising out of the present Act can be obviated by the provisions for the appointment of Commissioners, whose duties and powers should be fully defined, and by the appointment of official assignees, that any debtor finding himself unable to meet tbe demands of his creditors might apply to a Commissioner without the concurrence of a creditor ; and the Commissioner shall, upon being satisfied of the truth of the circumstances, receive the surrender of the estate, and, by an order then made, vest the whole estate in an official assignee. That upon notice to the Sheriff of the petition, all arrests or seizures under judgments from the Supreme or inferior Courts shall be dissolved, and tbat there shall be no ad interim sequestration unless upon compulsory sequestration. The Committee think that the working of the Act may be simplified and rendered less expensive by the modes of operation being fully defined, and by forms of " Petitions of Insolvency," schedules of assets and liabilities, forms for proof of debt, &c , being appended. The Committee think that most estates can be efficiently worked by an official assignee, but they would suggest that provision be made for the election by the creditors of a trustee, to act with the official assignee whenever a majority of creditors in number and amount should apply for such appointment, but not otherwise. 7. In reply to your seventh query, your Committee suggest, that in all cases of insolvency there should be three meetings of creditors convened for the proof of debts before the Commissioner, say within three months, beyond which time no local claims should be admitted, but for debt beyond tbe Colony a longer period should be allowed. That before the second meeting of creditors, the official assignee shall realize all perishable assets of the estate, aud shall present to the Commissioner a balance-sheet, setting forth the position of tbe estate, which balauce-sheet shall be submitted at the second meeting of creditors, and the official assignee shall then receive instructions from the crjditors, (or if no creditors attend such meeting) then from the Commissioner for the realization of the balance of ths assets, and for the allowance to the insolvent of any portion of his estate. The Commissioner to have power to extend the time and number of meetings upon cause shewn.

March 17, I*os.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

8. Your committee think tbat the person to be appointed official assignee should be of that social status and business ability as to command the confidence of the mercantile community, and that he should give security by bonds to a large amount, say not less than two thousand pounds (£2000). They suggest that the funds realized should be deposited in a Bank to the credit of each insolvent's estate, to be operated upon by the official assignee for the time being, so as to prevent the accounts being looked upon in any way as private. They think, also, that care should be taken tbat the official assignee be made amenable to criminal proceedings for malversation of office. 9. The Committee recommend that the certificates of discbarge should be of two classes, to meet the cases of those who have been unfortunate, but to whom little or no moral blame attaches, and those who have brought themselves into that position by recklessness. In cases where fraud or culpable negligence appears, the Commissioner should have power to withhold a certificate or to commit to the Supreme Court for trial, and such persons should be liable to severe punishment. 10. The Committee think it desirable that there should be legislation regulating private assignments for the benefit of creditors, and rendering binding on the creditors the acts of two-thirds in number or amount of such creditors over twenty pounds (£20); and they recommend that it be by separate enactment. 11. Your Committee suggest that very great improvement would appear by making the Act as com. prehensive as possible, and by rendering clear the modes of operation, and thus leaving as little as possible to the discretion of the Commissioners. Under the present Act not only have the learned Judges been perplexed, but creditors have been unable to obtain any satisfaction, and have been compelled to allow rogues to escape unpunished. Your Committee also place great stress on the character of tbe person to be appointed assignee : they think that be should be a man of respectability, of thorough business habits, and, as far as practicable, of good general business knowledge ; and the Committee further recommend tbat some provision should be made by law to prevent any delay in the declaration and payment of dividends when the funds accumulated in the hands of the assignee shall justify the same. Robert Limington, Christchurch, 17th March, 1865. Chairman. No. 28. Mr. Justice Chapman to the Attorney-General. Sir,— Dunedin, 24th April, 1865. I have the honor to enclose answers to the eleven questions contained in your Circular, No. 8, dated 20th January, 1865, relative to the working of the Debtors and Creditors Act, and to the amendments necessary for the effectual administration of the Estates of Insolvent Debtors. I need scarcely say that these answers embrace only a few leading principles, as matters of detail must necessarily be left to the person who may be entrusted with the preparation of the Bill. I am, Sir, Your Obedient Servant, The Honorable the Attorney-General, &c, &c, <fee. H. S. Chapmak. Replies to Questions Comprised in Circular No. 8, dated 20th January, 1865. First Question. —As to the present Constitution of the Insolvency Court? I submit that the most effectual mode of exercising jurisdiction over the estates and persons of Insolvents is by means of Commissioners sitting continually for tbat purpose, with an appeal in all necessary cases to the Supreme Court. This is the law in Victoria, with the addition of a double appeal. The Commissioner in Melbourne sits perpetually. In Geelong the Judge of the County Court is the Commissioner, and he sits at short intervals, but sufficiently long to exhaust the business. Appeals from the Commissioners are heard by the Judge in Equity, who sits every Thursday to hear such appeals, with other business. From the decisions of this Judge there is a further appeal to the full Court. The Act should give to the Governor in Council power to appoint any fit and proper person to be a Commissioner of Insolvent Estates, and this would enable the Government to cast the duty on existing officers of the Government where the Insolvency business is insufficient to require a Commissioner with no other duties. Thus the Judges of the District Courts might be appointed Commissioners in some places, and even the Resident Magistrates in others. That will be a mere departmental arrangement, and the jurisdiction will still be exercised by a Commissioner ex nomine under the Act. This economising expedient is extensively adopted in Victoria, not only in the Insolvency jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, but in other cases. Under District Acts the Governor in Countilis empowered to appoint Judges of the Courts of Mines, Judges of the County Courts, Commissioners of Insolvency, and Chairmen of General Sessions. Practically, the same individual holds the four commissions. There is no confounding of jurisdictions. Thus, if in any contemplated Act, the Governor be empowered as I suggest, the duties may be cast on the District Court Judge, the Registrar of the Supreme Court, or the Resident Magistrate, or any other competent person. In such case, the Act should give to the Governor in Council power to define districts. There should also be a provision that where no such appointments of Commissioners shall have been made, the Jurisdiction under the Act shall be expressed by a Judge of the Supreme Court. This will, 1 submit, give to the Government a very ample and at the same time reasonable latitude, suitable to the fluctuating circumstances of a gold-mining population. Second Question. —Whether it will be desirable to separate the jurisdiction from that of the Supreme Court ?

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D—No. 5

The great expense which such separation would entail on the Government seems to me to be uti objection almost insuperable, and I am of opinion that the Insolvency Jurisdiction will be most conveniently and economically exercised by making the jurisdiction a part of that of the Supreme Court (as in Victoria) and treating the functions of the Commissioners as auxiliary thereto, instead of as independent thereof. The proceedings should therefore be initiated before a judge of tbe Supreme Court, In the case of compulsory sequestration it should bo by rule nisi to shew cause why the estate should not be sequestrated. In the case of voluntary sequestration the Petition should be presented to a Judge as at present, and the order of Sequestration should be made by him. The Commissioner then acts upon the order which should have some further operation as will be explained under the answer to Third Question. —As to the expediency of giving to the Resident Magistrate Jurisdiction? I have already suggested in what manner the Government may clothe the Resident Magistrate with Jurisdiction without any provision to that effect. In the Act, if thought necessary, a limit may however be placed on his jurisdiction by a clause that whenever any Resident Magistrate shall have been appointed a Commissioner, he shall not act where the value of the estate exceeds a certain specified amount. Fourth Question. —As to the proceedings ? The suggestions made in answer to other questions will, to some extent, shew considerable simplification and saving both of time and expense. The rest must be left to the rules of practice which the Judges should have power to make. Fifth question.—As to the vesting of the estate of tbe Insolvent ?' The clumsy and long exploded mode of causing the estate to vest in the Assignee is tbe great defect of the Debtors and Creditor's Act. It may be briefly described as requiring at least fourteen weeks time to do the work of one minute. In Dunediu the Judges have been unable to sit oftener than once in six weeks. There are usually from 00 to 70 cases, and the sittings sometimes lasts four or five days. The course at pre.ent is this, when the Petition is accepted by the Judge the first hearing is appointed. If the Petition is not presented until within fourteen days of tbe next sitting of tbe Court under the Act, the first hearing cannot be for more than six weeks. At this first hearing a day is appointed and advertised for a meeting of creditors to elect Assignees or Registrars, and at the second hearing (six weeks from the first) the Trustees so chosen (if any) are approved of or accepted, and if none be chosen, a very common case, the Court does its best to pick up men who will act. At this second hearing the Insolvent is ordered to convey to the Trustees, and a third hearing is appointed six weeks from the second, and at this third hearing the conveyance is made, or if previously made, the fact is made known to the Court. The Insolvent having complied with all orders of the Court, if there be no opposition, is discharged. Thus the shortest time to get the estate out of the Insolvent is fourteen weeks, and it may extend to nearly twenty weeks. Now by making provision for an Official Assignee it may be effected by the last stroke of the Judge's pen, in signing the order of sequestration. Not even is a vesting order (as suggested) necessary. Tbe legal operations of the order of sequestration is prescribed by tbe Act. The course of proceeding should be this : The Insolvent presents his petition to a Judge of the Supreme Court; if approved of, the acceptance is endorsed on the petition, and upon that endorsement the order of sequestration is drawn with by the proper officer. This order"operates at once (by a clause in the Act of course) to vest the Insolvent's estate real and personal in the Official Assignee named in the order; it should operate also to protect the Insolvent from arrests (except by a Judge's order), and if he be in custody he may move at once for his discharge. Sixth Question. —As to the expediency of appointing Official Assignees? I consider the appointment of Official Assiguees, coupled with the immediate vesting operation of the order, as the most successful improvement in the Insolvent law ever devised, and chiefly for two reasons;First, —It makes it the sole business of a responsible officer to administer the estate, and to give him title at the instant. 1 think, however, that the creditors should have power to elect a trade Assignee, or perhaps two trade Assignees in large estates, to act with the Official Assignee. In England the Official Assignees are appointed by the Lord Chancellor, and in Victoria they are appointed by the Chief Jutice of the Supreme Court. But I think there is some inconvenience in either the Governor or the Judges exercising the appoinlment, as in cases of default, the Government will always be called upon to pay losses. I would therefore suggest that the several Chambers of Commerce should be empowered to elect fit and proper persons to be Official Assignees, and upon a certificate of such election being presented to the Judges with an affidavit of execution the formal appointment, or acceptance of the appointment, should be made by a Judge's order. Tbe Judge should be empowered to take security by bond to the Registrar. The advantages of this course would be considerable. The Judges would be relieved from anything like patronage. Tbe best choice would probably be made; for tbe mercantile body would have a strong interest in selecting competent and trustworthy men. If the best choice should not be made, neither the Government nor the Judges would be chiirgeable with the mistake. Seventh Question.—As to the speedy and just administration of the Estates? I submit that this question is answered by the observations already made on the appointment of official Assignees, with the check of a trade Assignee, aided of course by the vigilance of tlie Commissioner. Tlie immediate vesting of the Estate is also an enormous saving of time and a prevention of all opportunity of any improper dealing with the Estate. The Act should also require the perpetual co-opeiation of the Insolvent, and there should be some specific punishment for neglect to afford such aid. Eighth Question. —With regard to the custody and security of the Estate and the money arising therefrom ? The Act may require that the Official Assignee, so soon as he shall have collected a certain sum (in Victoria £20) shall open an account in some Bank in the name of the estate and of himself and his co trustee ; but I do not think the Treasurers should be made the recipients of the moneys in the first instance. The case differs materially from that of the Administrators of the Estates of intestates. The Administrator is an officer of the Government, and every security should be taken not only against his defaults, but also against that of the Treasurers and Sub-Treasurers. But if the Chamber of Commerce

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

he empowered to elect the Official Assignees, and the Creditors of such estate to elect a Trade Assignee* and the Court bo required to take ample security, I do not think the Government, is called upon to go further, the more especially as all proceedings will be under the control of the Commissioner, and a plan of distribution will be submitted as soon as funds are collected to pay a dividend. Moreover, tbe watchful eyes of the Creditors are always upon the Official and Trade Assignee, and they or any one of them can apply to the Commissioner, or, if need be, to tbe Court in case Of unusual delay. In the case of Administrators, on the other hand, the recipients of the fund are often unknown, or if known, are at a distance, and so the fund may be for a long period in the custody of tbe law. I think, however, there should be provision for the payment of unpaid dividends into the Treasury, and also the surplus of any Insolvent Estate, subject to a Judge's order, and after six years all unclaimed moneys should become the property of the Crown. This is the case under the Audits Act of Victoria. Ninth Question.—-As to provisions for the punishment of Insolvent Debtors? This is a feature in which the Debtors and Creditors Act is very defective. The Court has only power to discharge the Insolvent on such terms and conditions as to the Court shall seem fit: it has not specific powers to grant, refuse, or suspend anything in the nature of a Certificate, and no power to imprison for any specified offences. To amend this, I would suggest tbe introduction of the Certificate of discharge as in England with power to suspend or refuse the same for certain specified offences, e.g. 1 Neglecting to make a full and complete disclosure of his estate. 2. Contracting debts without intending to pay the same, or without having reasonable or probable expectation of being able to pay tbe same. 3. Unjustifiably dissipating his means. 4. Disposing of his estate or any part thereof, either by sale, mortgage, or pledge, otherwise than for bona fide value. 5. Appropriating to his use any trust funds. 0. Giving to any Creditor any fraudulent or unjust preference after he shall have become indebted and incapable of satisfying his Creditors. 7. If he shall already have become Insolvent or shall have compounded with his Creditors within years. 8. Omitting to keep proper books of account of a trade. 9. Having against him any unsatisfied judgment for seduction, crim. con, breach of promise of marriage, libel, slander, assault, or any malicious torts. 10. Putting any Creditor to any unjustifiable expense by any frivolous or unjustifiable defence of any action. 11. Reckless or improvident conduct or expenditure, including gambling. 12. Neglecting to afford his Assignees reasonable assistance in collecting and realizing his estate. I do not give this list of offences as exhaustive, but merely as examples of the most common which come before the notice of the Court. The list might be greatly extended. Tbe Commissioner, in refusing a certificate, should have power to report the cause of his refusal to the Court, and the Court should have power to imprison the Insolvent, in certain cases for a period of two years. Tenth question. —As to alterations necessary in composition deeds ? Some alterations will be necessary as regards composition deeds and voluntary assignments, but I am not at present prepared to specify them. The clauses in the Debtors and Creditors Act are taken from the English Bankrupt Act. Several cases have come before the Court here, and we have been guided by several recent decisions of the Courts at Westminster. These decisions have placed very strict limits upon the clauses in question, and have no doubt interfered with the general intention of the Legislature in favor of voluntary arrangements; but the Courts will not permit their jurisdiction to be ousted by any but very unambiguous provisions. The course which it will be necessary for the draftsmen to pursue is this : the several decisions must be carefully examined, and, where they raise doubts, or point out ambiguities in the existing clauses, such doubts and ambiguities should be cured by making the clauses clear and specific. In some respects the Act in force in Victoria, 5 Vie. No. 19, Sees 33 to 37, and 7 Vie. No. 19, Sees. 8 to 11, are more specific than the English Act, and I see no great difficulty in constructing clauses based on those now in force, but amended to meet difficulties disclosed by recent judicial decisions, so as to give ample effect to voluntary arrangements. If this be effectually done, it will afford great relief to the ordinary Insolvent jurisdiction of the Court. Eleventh question.—As to improvements generally ? I would observe generally, tbat in any future Act there should be no distinction between Bankruptcy and Insolvency (or consequently) between trades and ' other insolvents. In contemplation of compulsory sequestration, the acts, or dealings, or even negligencies of the debtor, which should be deemed acts of insolvency, should be very specifically enumerated, and one of a comprehensive character should be introduced by neglecting to satisfy a judgment debt after a certain specified time, say one month; the Court should still (chiefly on economical grounds) be the Supreme Court, aided by Commissioners, as I have suggested, which Commissioners may be the Judges of the District Courts, the Registrars of the Supreme Court, where the business is small, or the Resident Magistrates with a limitation in value in the latter case. The machinery of the Official Assignees should be introduced with the check of Trade Assignees. The Judge's order in the case of voluntary sequestration, in the rule absolute, in the case of compulsory sequestration, should operate at once to vest the estate in the official assignee; and when the trade assignee is elected he should be jointly possessed with the official assignee. I am well aware that it is not very easy to render any general observations of great practical use ; but, when any bill is drawn and printed 1 shall be ready to make such suggestions thereon as my experience in the working of the insolvent law of Victoria may enable me to do. I beg also to suggest that any bill which may be drawn should be sub-

r< DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

1 .—No. 5.

mitted to some intelligent merchants for their observations, as such observations will be of great service to the draftsmen in the first instance, and to the Legislature generally in the framing of a practical and working measure. H. S. Chapman. Dunedin, 24th April, 1805. No. 29. The Chamber of Commerce, Wellington, to the Attorney-General. Sißj— Chamber of Commerce, Welllington, 19th June, 1865. In reply to your letter of the 20th January last, addressed to this Chamber, inviting an opinion and suggestions on the law relating to Debtors and Creditors, and in particular to the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, I have the honor to inform you that the subject has had the earnest attention of the members, and it is now my duty to report to you the decision they have arrived at. In the first place, I must tell you frankly that they are unable to answer seriatim the questions put by you, and for this reason, that they are of opinion that there should be no Court of Insolvency at all. The evils of the existing state of the law require a remedy stronger than the alteration of the minutia.. To quote the words of an able writer on the subject, the cardinal error consists in imposing on a body essentially judicial, duties essentially administrative. They believe that the estate of an Insolvent ought to be managed by the optional administration of a separate executive department of the Government, such department acting through an official Trustee appointed to each district. By " optional " they mean that, in the first instance, the creditors should, if they choose, be allowed to appoint a trustee, to take possession, get in debts, realise, and in short manage the estate of the debtor for the purpose of winding it up with all convenient speed. In the event, however, of the creditors failing to agree on and appoint a trustee within a time to be fixed by law, then tbe entire control of the Insolvent's estate should be vested in the Official Trustee, who should act on his own judgment, but there should be the power of appeal. They believe it to be a mistake (I use the words of the author already referred to) to choose a body adapted for deciding legal controversies, to be the executive body for transacting mercantile business. The Supreme and Minor Courts should of course be open to all parties, provided any wrong was done, just in the same way as the Courts are now open to all or any one who may have real or supposed grievances to redress ; but what this Chamber contends is, that when a man is declared an Insolvent, his Creditors should, if they choose, be able to appoint some one to manage bis estate; and, if they do not choose to do so, or fail to agree on a Trustee, then, as before suggested, an official trustee should take the matter in his own hands. It will then be the fault of the Creditors themselves if the estate does not yield as much as it should have done. The law, however, must define what is to be an Act of Insolvency. It is not sufficient to allow the debtor to be the only judge as to whether he is to take the protection of the Act or not, the creditors must also have the power under some circumstances of declaring the debtor an Insolvent, and I am advised by the Chamber of the Commerce, to suggest that, after judgment has been granted in any Court of Law, it shall be in the power of such Court (upon sufficient proof of claim being adduced to its satisfaction) to order an ad interim sequestration of the debtor's estate for a period of days, sufficient to enable such claim to be established, and in the application of any judgment creditor, whose claim may not have been satisfied within days, the Court shall order the estate of the debtor to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The object being to prevent the original Creditor having a preferential claim over an Insolvent's estate. Due provision should of course be made for the punishment of any fraud or attempt at fraud. This Chamber is supported in its views by many high legal anthorities, and by the knowledge of the result of the working of the English system in England, where statistics show a sum equal to 45 per cent, of the realised assets is wasted in expenses, while in Scotland, where the trustee system is adopted and where there is no Court of Bankruptcy, the cost of collection does not amount to more that 20 per cent. In conclusion, from what I have said, you will notice that this Chamber believes that the present system cannot either be modified or amended with advantage A new system, a radical change, is wanted. Our Judges must not be required or expected to become executive officers for the purpose of directing the management of Insolvent's Estates, nor should we devolve administrative duties on Courts of Law. I have, &c, C. J. Pharazyn, Chairman. The Honorable the Attorney-General, __c, &c, &c. No. 30. Sib, — Attorney General's Office, Wellington, 24th June, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the date quoted in the margin, and in reply am directed to express the thanks of the Attorney-General to the Chairman of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce for his communication of the 19th inst. enclosed therein. I have, <fee., R. G. Fountain, For the Assistant Law Officer. The Secretary, Chamber of Commerce, Wellington.

19 June, ISC').

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. S

No. 31. Secretary, Wellington Chamber of Commerce, to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Chamber of Commerce, Wellington, 23rd June, 1865. I have the honor, by direction of the Chairman of this Chamber, to enclose herewith the reply to your letter of the 20th of January last. I have, &c, Herbert K. Lillicrap, Secretary. The Hon. the Attorney-General, &c, &c, &c, Wellington. No. 32. Mr. Justice Johnston to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Judge's Chambers, Wellington, 21st June, 1865. I am sorry I have not had leisure enough to send you long before this time, answers to yours and the late Attorney-General's circulars respecting the law of Debtors and Creditors, and yours of Ist March respecting funds under the control of the Supreme Court. I have at last been able to prepare observations on both subjects, which I have to offer you with the conviction that they are but crude and ill digested, and by no means so satisfactory or complete as they might h-.ve been if I had had more time for their consideration. I send you to-day my observations on the law of Debtors and Creditors. Those which refer to the financial business of the Court are in course of transcription. I have, &c, The Hon. the Attorney-General. Alexander Johnston. OBSERVATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS RESPECTING THE LAW FOR THE RELIEF OF DEBTORS AND THE SECURITY OF CREDITORS. I.—general observations. 1. I must preface my observations by stating that the amount of experience which I have had of the operation of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, within my Judical District, has been by no means great; has indeed been probably quite inconsiderable when compared with that acquired in the other Judicial Districts of the Colony; and my suggestions theiefore will deserve but little attention when they are at variance with the practical experience of the other Judges. 2. Their inconveniences and imperfections, which I have discovered in the practical working of the present system, relate chiefly to the unnecessary number of proceedings in Court, the absence of a Judge from places where estates must be administered, the necessity for the execution of trust deeds, and the want of an Official Sequestrator and Trustee (especially in cases where the creditors are apathetic.) To those various topics I shall presently advert in detail. 3. The great objects which I understand it to be the intention of the Legislature to attain by an Insolvency or Bankruptcy Law, are to make the Estates of persons who cannot pay their Creditors in full as available as possible for rateable distribution, and to protect honest and unfortunate Debtors from being harassed by legal proceedings, and deprived of the means of supporting themselves. 4. That system, therefore, will be the best which will, in the simplest, amplest, speediest, and cheapest manner, ensure the attainment of those objects. 5. But the system must be one which will be equally applicable to all sections of the community and all parts of the Colony. 2.—special objections to existing system. 1. Serious delay and expense are caused, in cases where the petitioner resides on an Estate situated at a distance from the place of residence of the Judge, in the transmission of petitions and otherwise. 2. The provision for ad interim sequestration is liable to be inoperative because there is no Official Sequestrator, and I have often found it impossible to get the condition of taking possession of the property, which is necessary to make the sequestration available, carried out. 3. As to the order of ad interim protection, I have found it necessary to make the form special, by inserting a condition that it should cease to operate under circumstances under which a writ of arrest might issue. Doubt has also arisen respecting its operation, whether such an order entitles a debtor in custody to be discharged fiom confinement or not. I have held, by a liberal construction of the Act, that it does; but the matter is by no means free from doubt. Moreover, the effect of such discharge upon the rights of the creditors may be questionable. 4. As to the appointment of Trustees—l have Lund, especially in cases of small or poor Estates, that Creditors will not take tbe trouble to attend the Creditors' meetings, and recommend Trustees; and I have been obliged on many occasions to ask the Registrar of the Court to accept the Trust rather than allow the proceedings to be defeated ; but this is a course which seems to me very objectionable. (See my suggestions respecting Official Trustees.) 5. The necessity for drawing and executing a trust deed seems to entail delay, expense, and hazard, which might be obviated by making the order of the Court operate as a statutory assignment of all estate and rights of a Debtor in certain usual Trusts, or in special Trusts to be stated in the order. 6. With regard to maintenance money of debtors in prison, the question has arisen, whether the Court is not bound to discharge a prisoner on his own motion if maintenance money be not paid. I have held that it is not the right of the prisoner to enforce this provision, and that a discharge for that reason which would operate as a satisfaction of tbe detaining Creditor's debts would be a great hardship on the Creditor, unless a demand for the money had been made on him, and the payment of it had been refused by him.

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

Non constat, that any maintenance money will be payable after arrest as the prisoner may be supportable: in prison by himself or his friends. It seems to me that the above objections might be easily removed by the Legislature, and I now proceed to make— 3.—A FEW PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS For meeting the above-mentioned special objections, and providing a less cumbrous and expensive mode of procedure. 1. With respect to the question of tribunal, I am of opinion that there is no necessity for the establishment of any fresh one. but that the institution of a new tribunal would give rise to many difficulties and complications, and would be burdensome and costly. I think, however, that a re-distribution of the insolvency business would be desirable, reference to the Judges of the Supreme Court being made only for judicial or final purposes, a portion of the work being done by Resident Magistrates away from the residence of a Judge, certain routine work by the Registrars, and the administrative work by officers to be appointed as suggested in the next paragraph, full opportunities being reserved to all parties to apply to the Supreme Court on questions of principle. 2. It would be necessary, for carrying out a system of procedure such as I am about to suggest, that a new officer should be appointed such as I have spoken of in my suggestions respecting tbe financial business of the Supreme Court, who shall act as receiver-assignee, or trustee of insolvent as well as of intestate estates. The duties of such an officer would be sufficient in some parts of the Colony to occupy the whole time of a competent person, while in other places some merchant or professional man of character and business habits might be induced to undertake the duties as they might arise. In my opinion such officers ought to be amply remunerated, especially as they ought to be made personally responsible for the acts of persons employed by them ; and I think that it would be desirable to offer them, besides fixed salaries, a certain percentage on the realized proceeds of estates, and they should find sufficient sureties. 3. The official trustees ought to account regularly to the Registrars of the Supreme Court, and pay all monies in as received to the Supreme Court fund, as suggested in my other report. The official trustee should appoint and pay his own " messenger," and be responsible for his acts and those of his subordinates, if any. The messenger ought, I think, to be peace-officer, and to take an oath, and be subject, as well as the official trustee, to the summary jurisdiction of the Court. I shall now attempt to sketch out the various details of a mode of procedure which might be adopted with existing tribunals, and the addition of such officers as I have just mentioned. 4.—mode of procedure. , 1. Petition to be filed on application by petitioner to Registrar or Deputy-Registrar, whether at residence of Judge or not. Registrar to see, previous to filing, that the provisions of the act axe prima facie complied with, and may refuse to file subject to appeal to Judge. 2. On Petition being filed, the whole estate, in case of Debtor's petition, to become ipse fact) vested ad interim in the Official Trustee. In case of petition by Creditor estate not to pass till affidavit of notice served on Debtor filed. Debtor to have power to apply to Court to take petition off file, with stay of proceedings in meantime. 3. On affidavit that notice of filing petition by a Debtor has been served by the Petitioner on the scheduled Creditors, Registrar to issue order for ad interim protection. 4. The order of ad interim protection should have certain operation by Statute without specifying conditions. It should be by the Act declared void under circumstances under which a Writ of Arrest might, issue, and on any contravention by the Debtor of tbe provisions of the Act; and it might be made to entitle the Debtor, if in custody, to discharge from custody; but there should be a provision that such discharge should not operate as a satisfaction of the debt. 5. It should be the duty of the Official Trustee, through the Messenger, to take possession of the estate, and dispose as soon as necessary of perishable property where any trade or business is carried on by the Debtor. On application either by him or by the Official Trustee, with concurrence of Registrar, trade or business might be carried on under inspection of Official Trustee, who might also have power to allow necessary expenses and maintenance of Debtor and family out of proceeds, accounting in the way suggested by tbe other report. 6. The Official Trustee should be obliged, within a short period of time, to call a meeting of Creditors. 7. The Official Trustee should preside at all meetings of Creditors. 8. The business at the first meetings should be just to choose two Creditors Assignees to act with the Official Assignee; and if sufficient number of Creditors should not attend, they should not elect Trustees; the Official Trustee to proceed alone with the administration of the estate. 8 a. The Debtor ought to be obliged to attend such meetings, and produce such books and documents as he may possess and be asked for; and, when allowed, to make any statements or explanations which he may think fit, but not to be obliged to answer questions. 9. At tbe same meeting the Creditors might make resolutions as to the mode of winding up the estate, which might be binding on the Trustees, unless they should apply to the Court for other directions. 10. The propriety of enterirg into a Deed of arrangement, such as is contemplated by the provisions of Sections 20 23 of the Act of 1802, might be considered at the meeting.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 8

11. After tho election at such meeting, of Creditors' Assignees, the whole estate and effects to be vested in tbem and the Official Trustee, and all acts to be validly done by the Official Trustee and one of the Creditors' Trustees concurring therein. 12. Within a short time after such first meeting, Official Trustees to give general notice to Creditors of time and place of next meeting of Creditors, and of time not under or over certain limits within which notice of opposition or wish to examine the Insolvent shall be given to the Official Trustee; if within time prescribed no such notice as last mentioned given, case to be set down for final hearing at first sittings under the Act within the Judicial District. 13. Debtor not to be obliged to attend for final discharge unless notice given by opposing Creditor or Official Trustee. 14. If notice of opposition or of wish to examine Debtor given in due time, Official Trustee to give notice to Creditors for preliminary examination. 15. Such examination to be conducted by Resident Magistrate on oath, in absence of a Judge, or by a Judge at Chambers, if there be no convenient silting of the Court. 10. Further hearing if necessary before Resident Magistrate or Judge at Chambers, but final hearing in Supreme Court with Official Trustee's report of previous proceedings before the Court. 17. At tbe first hearing opposition may be made, even if not before; but no terms as to adjournment if no notice of opposition at previous stage. 18. A period should be fixed within which claims of Creditors must be made and proved, and the limitation should be pleadable. 19. The powers of Court as to conditions of discharge to continue as they are. 20. Time within which the Trustees shall be bound to distribute, to be limited by Act, unless express order by Court. 21. Assets to be distributed rateably according to amounts proved by affidavit, unless express order by the Court, as in claims of property. 22. Trustees to have power to award maintenance if necessary out of assets to Debtor and family till final discharge. 23. At any stage of proceedings Debtor, Creditor, or Trustee may apply to Court for directions or order, and costs may be allowed out of estate if application deemed reasonable by the Court. 24. Provisions for pleading final discharge or conditional discharge, with performance ef condition in bar, and conditional discharge with condition not yet broken, or pending of proceedings in Court by way of dilatory pleas in action for causes covered by petition and schedule, and Debtor re-arrested for such cause to be discharged by Judge or Resident Magistrate on affidavit. 25. Percentage of realised proceeds of estate to be paid into General Fund, say 7_r per cent, of which sper cent, to be divided among the Trustees who act (Official and Creditors') and 2£ to remain to the account of the Supreme Court fund. 26. With respect to the payment of maintenance money for Debtors taken in execution, it occurs to me that it would be a convenient course to provide that the execution Creditor should be obliged to pay through the Sheriff to the Gaoler a fee of £1, to go to a maintenance fund, and each Creditor who should lodge a detainer should pay a like fee, and that if the Debtor should remain so long in prison that such fees would be exceeded at the rate of say seven shillings a-week, the Gaoler should give notice to the execution and detaining Creditors to pay weekly maintenance money at least one week in advance; and that if the Creditors should refuse or neglect to do so for the space of fourteen days, the gaoler should be entitled to discharge the prisoner as to tbe defaulting Creditor's debt; and that such discharge should not operate as a satisfaction of the debt, but should protect the Debtor from being again arrested for the same cause of action, except under circumstances under which a writ of arrest could be issued before judgment. Such is a rough outline of a series of provisions which I think might be introduced, along with those portions of the Act of 1802 not thereby affected, into a new Bill, tbe former Act being repealed. I do not by any means wish it to be understood that I consider the above provisions complete and thoroughly digested. On the contrary, I merely suggest them for consideration and criticism, but with the hope that they may be of some use in case his Excellency's advisers should propose any measure on the subject to the Legislature during the approaching Session. Wellington, Now Zealand, 21st June, 1805. Alexander J. Johnston. No. 33. The Attorney-General to Mr. Justice Johnston. Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 25th June, 1865. Sir, —I have to acknowledge the receipt of your Honor's letter of the 21st instant, and to convey to you the very sincere thanks of the Government for the observations on the law of Debtors and Creditors contained therein. I have, __c., Henry Sewell. His Honor Mr. Justice Johnston, Wellington. No. 34. Mr. Justice Johnston to the Attorney-General. Judge's Chambers, Wellington, 27th June, 1805. Sir, —I have tho honor to enclose a postcript to my observations on the law of Debtors and Creditors, and a note of errata, to which I beg to call your attention. I have the honor to be, Sir, Your obedient servant, The Hon. tbe Attorney-General. Alexander J. Johnston.

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

Postcript to Observations on the Law for Relief of Debtors and Creditors. 1. It will be necessary to make provisions to avoid the practical incumbrances which may arise in respect to the division of the Colony into Judicial Districts, and of the existence of various Registrars and Official Trustees within the same district. 2. The place at which an Insolvent Estate should be administered ought, as it would seem, to be prima facie the place at or near which the bulk of the property to be administered is situated. 3. But it would appear desirable that there should be considerable elasticity provided for the working of the machinery cf the system in that respect. 4. The particular Official Trustee in whom tbe estate should be first vested should be named in a vesting order (in ordinary cases made by the Registrar, in other cases by the Judge) of which notice should be given to the Creditors, and published in the Newspapers and Gazettes. 5. In cases where, after an original vesting order made, it should be made to appear to the Court that the estate could be more effectually administered at another place, the Court might be empowered to make a fresh vesting order transferring the estate from the original Official Trustee to the Official Trustee of the other place, and thereupon the former should transmit all documents and accounts to the latter ; so also, the Receiver of the Supreme Court fund at the one place should, if such transfer order be made, transmit a statement of the draft payments and balance to the Receiver at the other. The fund being one throughout tbe Colony there would be no substantial embarrassment in this course. The original Registrar, also, in such case, should transmit the petition, minutes, and documents, to the Registrar at the new place of administration. 6. In ordinary cases, where there is property of the estate situated within the local district of more than one Official Trustee, whether in the same Judicial District or not, it would seem that the Trustee in whom the estate is vested by order, should conduct the administration of the property in the other district through the Trustee of that district, who should act as his agent; and in such case the Receiver of the fund in the foreign district should communicate the transactions to the Receiver in the district where the first Trustee resides. Trustees acting as agents for other Trustees ought probably to be allowed half the percentage on the funds realised through them. 7. In order to prevent conflicts of jurisdiction between different judicial districts, it might be provided that when petitions have been presented in more than one Judicial District, they shall be consolidated and conducted at the place of residence of the Official Trustee named in the first vesting order; unless, on sufficient cause shown, the Judge of the District shall direct that the administration should be carried on at the other, or some other place, and should transfer the estate to the Official Trustee of that place, in which case all previous vesting orders should cease to be operative except for giving validity to acts done under them before notice of the transfer order. In such case of transfer, the petition and other documents in his custody would be transferred from Registrar to Registrar, and the accounts from Trustee to Trustee, and from Receiver to Receiver. 27th June, 1865. Alexander Johnston. ADDENDA OB ERRATA. In observations on the law for the relief of Debtors and Creditors, 111, 3 (2), before ipso facto insert " or order being drawn up," before affidavit insert " order made after," and add to the paragraph the following:—"The particular Official Trustee to whom estate to pass, to be named in order either by Registrar or Judge, and notice of the order to be duly published." (See supplementary observations on transfer of estate in postcript.) A. J. J. No. 35. The Attorney-General to Mr. Justice Johnston. Sir, — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 3rd July, 1865. I have to acknowledge the receipt of your Honor's letter of the 27th ult, with a brief postcript to obserservations on the law of Debtors and Creditors, and a note of Errata, and to convey to your Honor the thanks of the Government for the same. I have, &c, Henry Seweil. His Honor Mr. Justice Johnston, Wellington. No. 36. Mr. Justice Richmond's Reply to Queries on Law of Debtors and Creditors. Sir,— Dunedin, 14th July, 1865. I beg to forward the following replies to the Queries on the subject of the Law relating to Debtors and Creditors stated in your Circular Letter (No. 81) of 20th January last. Queries 1, 2, and 3. I think that it is undesirable to separate the Jurisdiction in Insolvency from that of the Supreme Court. A jurisdiction to take the initiatory steps in the procedure of the Supreme Court—as to receive Petitions, to grant adjudication of Insolvency in unopposed cases, to appoint a provisional Assignee, to convene the first meeting of Creditors, to authorize the sale of perishable or deteriorating stock—might advantageously be conferred upon District Judges, or Resident Magistrates specially appointed for the purpose, in places of considerable trade, where no Judge of the Supreme Court is resident. The first examination of the Insolvent might also be taken before the District Judge or Resident Magistrate so appointed.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

I doubt the expediency of conferring the power on Resident Magistrates to discharge prisoners in custody for small debts.—(See my general remarks on imprisonment for debt.) But some provision should be made to enable Debtors who ha\e lain in prison for a definite term to apply for a discharge informd pauperis. Gaolers to forward applications of such prisoners to the Registrar of the Supreme Court, and the Court to be empowered to appoint a Solicitor, and direct payment of a stipulated fee out of public funds. Query 4.—See subsequent answers. Query 5.-—Certainly a vesting order should be substituted for the present assignment. It should, I think, relate back, as regards the property of the Insolvent, to the Act of Bankruptcy, which, in the case of a Debtor's Petition, would be the presentation of the Petition. Query 6. —At present the law does not regulate the mode in which Assignees are appointed. In this Judicial District, the usual practice is to convene a meeting of Creditors for the election of Assignees. Failing any recommendation from the Creditors (and in nine cases out of ten at least there is no recommendation) the Judge at the hearing next after the day of the meeting makes the best selection he can from Creditors named in the schedule to the Debtor's Petition. In special cases, Trustees have been named by the Judge without calling a meeting of Creditors. As the present Act provides no official machinery of administration, and the Court itself is without such machinery and besides unfiled for the task, the duty has devolved, of necessity on the Creditors. It is, I submit, the true principle that the Creditors should administer in every case where they are willing to do so. The proceedings under the Act have in this District been, in a vast number of cases, merely formal, so far as regards giving tbe Creditors a dividend—the only substantial result being the discharge of the Debtor. Mercantile men in the Colony are generally too busy to make it worth their while to take any trouble where there is a small chance of a substantial dividend. Judging from the many schedules I have seen, and the many examinations I have taken, I should say that the greater number of the Insolvents discharged in this district began business in this Colony without capital, and possessed at the date of their Petitions no estate worth regarding. Many of them were indebted beyond their assets at the time they began business here. Not a few bad already taken the benefit of the Insolvency laws in neighbouring Colonies. Substantial estates have always, so far as I know, been wound up under Deeds of Arrangement. The distribution of the Bankrupt's Estate may rightly be regarded as the principal object of the law; were it the sole object which ought to be contemplated it might perhaps be safely left to the Creditors to come forward in all cases where there was any likelihood of their getting a substantial benefit; and there could be no great harm in such a state of things as I have described as prevailing in this District. But the detection and punishment of commercial fraud ought not to be wholly lost sight of. The ordinary machinery of the Criminal law is not sufficient for this purpose; and under existing arrangements the Supreme Court, in its Insolvency jurisdiction is quite helpless unless aided by the creditors. The administration of tbe law, in this respect, requires, in my opinion, some additional official machinery. Looking only to the interests of the creditors, I conceive that sonic additional official machinery is required. For even where there is a substantial estate, the body of creditors is often too slow in its movements. There is a difficulty in getting any one to take interim sequestration, and the estate is dilapidated before it can be taken possession of. On these grounds I have come to the conclusion that a body of official assignees ought to be appointed. Probably persons might be got to act in consideration of tbe receipt of a fixed percentage on the gross proceeds of the estates administered by them. And they should, of course, be bound to give security for the honest discharge of their functions. Immediately upon adjudication being made a provisional assignee of the estate should be appointed, with full powers not only for its interim custody (as under the present law), but to collect debts, and sell perishable stock, and (by authority of a Judge) any other stock likely to deteriorate by keeping, or to cause great expense. In general, this provisional assignee should be an official assignee. But a Judge should have power, on the application of a certain proportion of creditors, to appoint, at his discretion, any other person to be provisional assignee. Whether the official assignee, if appointed provisionally, should be the permanent assignee of the estate, should be left to the decision of a meeting of creditors duly convened. But in the absence of any resolution of such a meeting, the official assignee should be named in the vesting orders as the permanent assignee. Every assignee should be subject to removal by the Court. Query 7. —The costs of administration will always be great, and will wholly swallow up many estates. Many estates will not even suffice to pay tbe espense of administration. This is a result which must be faced if the law of Bankruptcy is to be administered for any other purpose than that of making a dividend in a few cases, and discharging debtors without investigation of their conduct. The present mode of proof is by affidavit, and tbe assignees or creditors to the amount of £50 are empowered by the General Rules of 1803 to contest proof. But the affidavit of the claimant is prima facie sufficient proof. It would be better to adopt the Scottish plan, and require the assignees to judge for themselves, upon the affidavits and vouchers produced by the claimants, of the validity and amount of the debts, with power to take legal advice. The result should be embodied in a scheme of division, which, being submitted to tho Court upon due notice, and not successfully objected to, should bo acted upon. It is desirable that every assignee should forward accounts of tbe estate to an officer (one might suffice for the whole colony) to be called an Accountant in Bankruptcy. Such an officer is needed as a check on assignees. He would have to be remunerated by salary. But, for a time, the office might perhaps be filled by some officer of tbe Colonial Treasury or Audit at less expense than would be occasioned by a distinct appointment.

" DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

Query B.—The checks supposed by my previous answer would give a reasonable degree of security to the vigilant. Additional expense and difficulty are always occasioned by additional precautions against fraud. It would never do to require orders of Court for every payment. The Judges cannot be expected, and would be wholly unable, effectually to supervise the operations of the assignees. Query 9,—lt will have been collected from my previous answers that I consider that more stringent provision is needed for the punishment of fraudulent debtors, and to prevent relief under the law of insolvency from being granted to persons whose conduct does not entitle them to it. One reason for the appointment of official assignees is to provide for the investigation of cases of this kind. It should be made a part of the duty of the official assignee to report on the conduct of the Bankrupt after investigating his affairs. It should also be the duty of this officer, with the sanction of the Accountant in Bankruptcy, to institute prosecutions in cases of supposed fraud, amounting by law to a misdemeanour. It is inexpedient that the Judges should direct prosecutions.—(See further as to provision for this purpose my answer to Query 11.) Query 10.—Arrangements with creditors out of Court should be allowed as at present. But to save the great length of those deeds, and to preclude the innumerable doubts which are raised as to the reasonableness and validity of their claims, it would be well to enact that certain common provisions should be implied in every deed made under the provisions of the Act, subject however to such express modifications as the parties thought fit to adopt, if they are inclined to run the risks which attend originality in such matters. The provision would be similar to that of the Conveyancing Ordinance (J. 10) respecting covenants for title, and other common clauses. Two classes of deeds, at ieast, would have to be provided for— those containing a cession of the estate, and mere composition deeds without a cession. In the former class the common clauses should be a fully expressed trust for conversion and division of the proceeds— a release of the Debtor—a proviso saving remedies against co-Debtors and Sureties. The division under these deeds should be according to the principles of the Court of Bankruptcy. In saying this, I assume that the new law will make full provision for the mode of division in Bankruptcy, as it is most objectionable that it should be left in each case (as at present under section 10) to the discretion of the Judge. A similar power of staying proceedings in Court to that now given by section 20 of the present Act (corresponding with section 187 of the English Bankruptcy Act of 1861) should be given to the majority of the Creditors. But the stay of proceedings should be upon a resolution of a meeting of Creditors, as under the English and Scotch law ;—(see 19 and 20 Vie, c. 79, section 35 ; 24 and 25 Vie, c 134, section 185.) The insolvent should not be allowed to hawk a deed about amongst his creditors; he should deal publicly with them as a body. Query 11. —The law should provide for a prompt adjudication of Bankruptcy, to be followed, as soon as possible, by possession being taken of the estate by the Official or other Provisional Assignee. Proceedings should be commenced, as at present, by Debtor's or Creditor's Petition. I see little use in requiring the concurrence of a creditor in a debtor's petition. It encourages the manufacture of debts for the purpose. In this district, it is significant that in almost every case the concurring creditor's debt is for money lent. I prefer the English law on this head, which allows a Debtor to petition for adjudication against himself.—(See sec. 86 of Act of 1801.) In the case of a Debtor's petition, adjudication should be immediate on presentation of the petition, which should be declared an Act of Bankruptcy. In England, the filing of a Debtor's petition is equivalent to adjudication.—(See sec. 87 of the Act of 1801.) In the case of a Creditor's petition, verified as at present by affidavit, of the Act of Bankruptcy on which it is grounded, and of the petitioning creditor's debt, the adjudication should be immediate ; but a short day should be given to the debtor to set it aside, and provision should perhaps be made for - summarily ordering satisfaction io be made to the debtor for the fraudulent or malicious presentation of a petition. The present list of Acts of Bankruptcy, contained in sec. 6of the Act, is defective. In the case of an absconding debtor, the section requires that the petition shall be presented within fourteen days after the debtor has absented himself from his usual place of business in such manner as reasonably to imply the intention to defeat or delay creditors. Now it commonly happens, that this reasonable implication only arises after the lapse of the prescribed period. On this head I recommend that the English law be followed as closely as possible. Notice of adjudication should be published when the time for shewing cause has expired, or sooner, if the Debtor consents. By the same order as adjudk_..ion is made, the first ordinary meeting of Creditors should be convened, the time being so fixed as to leave a sufficient interval for Creditors to file their affidavits of debt. The purpose of this meeting should be the election of Assignees, the preliminary investigation of the affairs and conduct of the insolvent. It shall be the duty of the Provisional Assignee to attend this meeting, the books of the insolvent having been previously handed over to him on oath. Tho insolvent should also be bound to attend the meeting, and should be compelled to give information as to his affairs to the Provisional Assignee, both before the meeting, and also to answer his reasonable questions at the meeting. If a proper president could be provided for this first ordinary meeting, so as to ensure the exercise of judicial discretion and the observance of judicial decorum, there is perhaps no official reason why the Bankrupt's first examination on oath should not bo taken at it.* But there will be difficulty about giving tbe meeting the desired semi-judicial character; I therefore recommend that the insolvent's first examination should be fixed for the first sitting (in insolvency) of the Supreme Court, held at a short interval after the first ordinary meeting of Creditors: as the insolvent's ultimate discharge may depend on the judgment of the Supreme Court, it is the more desirable that all the solemn examinations of the insolvent should be taken before it, —at least before some regularly constructed Court. * In Scotland the Sheriff's Clerk or his Deputy attends the meeting for the election of Trustee ; and two or more Creditors, by previous notice, may call ou the Sheriff to attend and preside.—(lo and 20 Vie, c. 79, sec, CB.)

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

The business at the first hearing before the Supreme Court would be the examination on oath of the insolvent; tbat, however, need only take place if required by the provisional or permanent Assignees, or by some Creditor. It is useless to take up the time of the Court in cases where the sworn schedule and books of the insolvent, together with his disclosures to the Assignees, appear sufficient to everybody concerned. At this hearing the vesting order will be made in favor of the elected Assignees, or of the Official Assignee, as the case might require. In case of a certain amount of opposition to the election of Assignees, the Court should perhaps have discretion as to the appointment. At a sufficient interval (not less than a month) to allow of some substantial investigation by the assignees of the insolvent's affairs, the second ordinary meeting of creditors should be held ; whereat the Assignees should produce their accounts made up to date, and should report to the meeting on the prospects of the estate, and the conduct of the insolvent. At the next sitting of the Supreme Court following the second ordinary meeting of creditors, the insolvent should again present himself for examination, and should be at liberty to apply for his discharge. But the power of the Court over the insolvent to compel disclosures, and require assistance in getting in the estate, should not be at an end till the full realisation of the estate. Perhaps the Court should have a discretion to require the insolvent to convey his real property as a condition of his relief. Such property, of course, could not pass by tbe vesting order. There should be the power of convening extraordinary meetings of creditors, as under the existing rules of practice. The assignees scheme of division of the estate should be filed in the Supreme Court; and the assignee having procured for the Registrar the appointment of a day for hearing objections, due notice should be given thereof by advertisement. There should be a final meeting of creditors to audit the accounts of the assignees. A vast number of particulars require specific provision:—The effect of adjudication as regards execution creditors ; the retro-active effect of the vesting order ; its effect upon goods, &c ; in the order and disposition of the insolvent with the consent of the true owner (as to which, the case of sheep upon terms might require alteration) ; the mode of dealing with onerous leases; the principle of equal division (now subject to the discretion of the Judges); the proof of debts payable in futuro, or as a contingency ; proof by secured creditors; the rights of the landlord ; protection of bona fide transactions posterior to an act of bankruptcy; and many other points. It is vain to attempt brevity. Every official bankrupt act must be, I submit, a code in itself. I can do no more than say, that to the best of ray judgment it will be advisable to follow closely the English law in the particulars above named, and many others. As regards the mode of administering the estate, I conceive tho Scottish principle of throwing everything on the creditors, when they are willing to agree, is the true one. Resort to the Supreme Court for mere matter of administration should be avoided. As to the extent and conditions of ultimate discharge, I feel great difficulty in giving an opinion. I incline to think that it is inexpedient, in any case, to leave after-acquired property liable. It is not the public interest to deprive men of the motive to accumulate, or to drive them away. I think the existing distinction between mere misconduct, punishable by postponement of relief, and criminal offences, should be adhered to, though the detail may require correction. The present state of the law regarding imprisonment for debt is, I confess, to me most unsatisfactory; and yet it is hard to suggest a remedy. On the one hand, the law operates harshly and unequal]}-—great offenders escaping, whilst helpless and harmless persons often suffer unduly. Ido not like to see questions of personal liberty left to the discretion of individuals not bound to observe any rule but that of their pri. vate interest and personal resentment. On the other hand, T should hesitate to remove the fear of imprisonment, lest the already-loose bonds of commercial morality should be still further relaxed. I venture, with real diffidence, to suggest that, instead of imprisonment for debt on final process, there might be substituted a system based on the following principles :— 1. Misconduct in the insolvent, not amounting to crime, to be summarily cognisable by the Supreme Court on the insolvent's second examination, and punishable by imprisonment on the debtors' side of the gaol. 2. An estate, probably sufficient to pay say 10s. in the £, to be presumptive evidence of insolvency through misfortune. An estate, not probably sufficient to pay that dividend, to be presumptive evidence of insolvency through misconduct. The probable amount of the estate to be determined by the Court. A second, or perhaps a third insolvency, should also be presumptive evidence of misconduct. 3. In the case of presumptive misfortune, the assignees or any creditor —-in the case of presumptive misconduct, the debtor to be at liberty to dispute and disprove the presumption, and the Court thereupon to convict or acquit accordingly. 4. Where imprisonment should be awarded on tbe mere presumption of misconduct arising from the smallness of tbe assets, it should be for a short term fixed by law. In cases of proved misconduct, the Judge should have a discretion as to the length of imprisonment, subject, of course, to a legal maximum. 5. The second ordinary meeting of creditors should be competent to resolve that the debtor should have his discharge without previous imprisonment. 6. Imprisonment under these provisions should not be deemed a conviction, and consequently should not be pleadable in bar to an indictment for any offence (as distinguished from mere trading misconduct), against the bankrupt law. The bankrupt should, of course, be compelable to give evidence on the investigation of his conduct. I have, &c, C. W. Richmond. The Hon. the Attorney-General.

" DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

No. 37. The Attorney-General to Mr. Justice Richmond. Sir, — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 20th July, 1805. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 14th inst., containing answers to queries on the law of debtors and creditors, and, in reply, to express the thanks of the Government to your Honor for the same. I have, &c, His Honor Mr. Justice Richmond, Dunedin. Henry Sewell. No. 38. Suggestions by the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce in reply to the Honorable the Attorney General's Circular No. 8, on the Subject of the Law relating to Debtors and Creditors. The Chamber has had under its serious consideration the subject referred to by the Honorable the Attorney-General. From the past experience of its own members, and tbe universal feeling of the community, it has arrived at the conclusion that to do justice to both Debtors and Creditors that law requires very considerable alteration and amendment. The Act of 1802 was, when it became law, justly deemed an invaluable boon, because it possessed at least the virtue of distributing among a body of Creditors generally, the assets of an Insolvent, instead of allowing him to dispose of his property in any way that caprice might suggest. As the necessity arose from day to day for having recourse to the benefits of the Act, it became apparent that its machinery was cumbrous and expensive; that the expense of winding up an estate bore an alarming proportion to the value of the property realised ; that sufficient prote_tion was not given either to creditors or honest debtors, and tbat even with the numerous enactnents of Great Britain and her colonies before it, our own Legislature omitted to provide for the many interests which have been cared for by them. Referring to the Circular, the Chamber begs to make the following suggestions in reply to the Honorable the Attorney-General's queries. The Constitution of the Court. 1. & 2. There can be no doubt, from the nature of the interests insolved, that it would be far better to appoint an Insolvency Commissioner for each Province than to permit the organization of the Court to exist as at present. The Judges have numerous and onerous duties to perform. They have to preside at four Criminal and four Civil Sessions annually. They travel on circuit; and, when not engaged at Nisi Prius, hold repeated sittings for adjudicating upon pure questions of law. Then, again, days are set apart in each week for disposing of business in chambers. So much time is occupied in the performance of these duties that a month, and occasionally nearly two months, intervene between the days set apart for disposing of insolvency business. The Chamber thinks that the Commissioner should be a gentleman of legal education and experience, and also that there should be a power of appeal from all decisions given by him. The Chamber, while taking this opportunity of reiterating its views regarding the appointment of an assistant Resident Magistrate (under the extended jurisdiction) ventures to suggest that the gentleman appointed to that office might also perform the duties of the Commissioner. The Commissioner should hold his Court either once or twice a weel. in the chief town of the Province to which he may be appointed, or even oftener, should circumstances render it necessary. 3. The Chamber is of opinion that Resident Magistrates, as such, should have no jurisdiction except in country districts, nor even in those districts would it bo expedient to vest in such officers the powers of a Commissioner. Cases have occurred where judgment has been recovered in a country Resident Magistrate's Court with extended jurisdiction, for sums of considerable amount, and long before steps could be taken by the Debtor for protecting his estate under the Debtors and Creditors Act, a sale has been made under the execution, and everything thus sacrificed. Such cases cannot so frequently occur in a town where a Judge resides, as he is invariably accessible for the purpose of obtaining a protection order. The Chamber therefore recommends that— Resident Magistrates in country districts should have power to accept and deal with the petition of any person residing within a given circuit, and to grant interim protection of person and estate, and also to take possession of all effects until the first meeting, which should be held before the Commissioner of the province ; from that time the estate should be wound up in the Commissioner's Court. Acts of Insolvency. A trader in this town lately convened a meeting of his Creditors in consequence of an action having been commenced against him to recover the amount of a Bill of Exchange He read a statement wl purported to explain his position, shewing an apparent surplus of £120 over his liabilities. lie bad the assurance to give his creditors tho option of accepting one or other of these alternatives, viz. : —That they should pay him a premium of £300, ta'c over his stock and release him from all liability, or that they should accept a dividend often shillings in the pound, part in cash and part by deferred payment. These proposals having been declined, he was requested to assign his estate for the benefit of bis creditors; but ibis, in turn, he also declined. The probabilities aie, that a few executions (entailing a vast amount ol' expense, as they invariably do) will sweep off the entire assets, and the creditors, who are not now in a position to enforce their claims, will be thus placed in a most lamentable position. This case suggests that it would be well if creditors were allowed to petition for the sequestration of an estate upon other than those mentioned in the Debtors and Creditors Act; for instance, the convention of a meet ing of creditors, or judgment on dishonoured bills, or the levying of a writ of execution (no matter at whose instance) is more than prima facie proof of the virtual insolvency of the debtor. Then, should not any

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

of these grounds be deemed sufficient to support a petition by a creditor for the sequestration of his debtor's estate. It will be borne in mind, too, that any creditor petitioning from malicious motives, and without reasonable grounds for believing in the truth of the statements which he may make, and upon which he may ask the Court to act, is liable to be mulcted ill damages. It is suggested that the process at present in force to prevent the departure of a debtor from colony to colony should be made applicable to the provinces of New Zealand, so that a creditor shewing the intention of a debtor to leave a province, for the purpose of evading his debts, should be stopped. A writ of arrest is at present only available where defendants intend to leave the colony. But, if the defendant proceeds (say) from Dunedin to (say) Nelson, he cannot be stopped from doing so, though he can leave the colony at Nelson, and thus evade his creditors. Jones and L Sampson are cases in point. Tbe defect could in a great measure be remedied by authority of a Judge of one province, on prima facie evidence that a debtor was going to another province with the ultimate intention of leaving the colony, to issue a writ of arrest to prevent him from leaving the province. Petitioning by a Debtor. It appears, according to the law as it stands at present, that a debtor not in custody cannot petition for the sequestration of his estate unless he obtains tbe concurrence of some creditor representing a claim of £50 or upwards. This seems objectionable; cases can easily be conceived where a small tradesman is indebted to a large number of creditors whose claims are under £50, and to a few whose debts exceed that sum. The debtor (not being in custody, and not being able to obtain the concurrence of the creditors above £50) has his estate, to the detriment of what may be the body of his creditors, left at the mercy of a few dissentients who only exercise the power given to thorn by the law. It is true that the debtor may execute a deed of arrangement and obtain the assent of the requisite majority, and thus render nugatory the opposition of the creditors above £50, but the objections to deeds of arrangement will be more pointedly referred to hereafter. General Proceedings. Upon a petition for sequestration by a debtor being presented to tlie Commissioner or to a Resident Magistrate, if he is satisfied with the validity of the grounds upon which the petitioner asks his interposition, an order should be made protecting the estate, or the estate and person of the petitioner, as he may think proper; and such estate should thereupon absolutely vest in an officer of the Court to be appointed. This order should remain in force until altered or rescinded by the Commissioner. It should also be a part of the order that the petitioner should at'end a meeting of his creditors, to be held before the Commissioner within seven days after the date of the order, to undergo an examination. At this meeting a trustee or trus'ees should be appointed by the creditors, and if the creditors decline to act, the Commissioner should have power to ajDpoint any person he might think fit as trustee to wind up the estate ; and the order making the appointment should have the effect of vesting in such trustee or trustees the assets of svhich the petitioner was possessed at the time of presentation of his petition. This would dispense with the necessity and expense of a deed of ass;gnment. The tiustee or trustees should receive a commission of 5 percent, on the gross amount realized, subject to augmentation or deduction in case the peculiar circumstances connected with any individual estate in the opinion of tho Commissioner warrants the variation. The trustees should be required to file a report on the first day of each month shewing the action they have taken in realizing the assets, and at the same time to lodge a duplicate receipt for all monies received by the Bank into which the trust funds have been paid. From time to time the Commissioner should direct that a dividend be declared upon the claims proved, and tbat a sum should be preserved in hand sufficient to pay similar dividends upon claims made. Creditors should be allowed to represent their claim without the intervention of a solicitor. In the case of a Petition by Creditors. It would no doubt be equitable to permit the debtor, at the first meeting, to adduce evidence to rebut the grounds relied upon by the petitioner when applying for and obtaining the preliminary order from the Commissioner or Resident Magistrate. Should the Commissioner think that these grounds have been destroyed, and that no act of insolvency has been committed, then the preliminary order should be rescinded. If there is no reason for questioning the justice of that order, then the proceedings should be similar to those suggested in regard to petitioning debtors. At the first meeting the Commissioner should appoint some future day for the further examination of the insolvent and any other persons, as may be deemed proper; and so on, from time to time, as he may consider the circumstances of the case warrant. At the conclusion of the final examination certificates of discharge should be awarded by the Commissioner after the following manner : — A first-class certificate to men who have become unable to meet their engagements from misfortune or unforeseen circumstances. Such a certificate should operate as an immediate discharge, with the concurrence of two-thirds of a meeting of creditors. A second-class certificate to those who have become insolvent through reckless trading. Such a certificate should have the effect of suspending the protection of tho insolvent for the space of one year, or for a longer period, dependent upon tho nature of tho case from the date of the certificate; but at the expiration of tbat time the insolvent should be deemed released from his liabilities. Insolvents not balancing their books annually should have their certificates refused. To men who, in tho opinion of the Commissioner, have acted fraudulently, no certificate at all should be granted; and should such Commissioner be of opinion that even this punishment does not meet the justice of the case, then he should have power to commit the insolvent to gaol to take his trial for the particular offence charged. In any case insolvents should be gazetted, and the Chamber would suggest

« DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

that the notice should be repeated during the space of a year both in the General G.vernmnt and Provincial Gazettes. Legal Priorities. At present, if the Sheriff, under an execution only one minute before the signing of tho order protecting the estate ad interim, seizes goods belonging to the debtor, those goods are charged with a legal prior claim in favor of the execution creditor to the amount of his debt and costs ; this, in tho opinion of the Chamber, is not equitable; and it therefore recommends that the law in this respect should be placed on a similar footing to that of England and the neighbouring colonies. All legal proceedings intended to affect the property of the insolvent, and all Sheriff's sales within twenty days before sequestration, should not confer a preference except in costs. Rent. Rent (when there are any goods of the insolvent in the building for the use of which rent is payable) must of course be still treated as a preferential claim. And the Chamber also thinks that servants and clerks (agreeable to the rule which prevails elsewhere) should be treated also as preferential credhors for (say) one month's wages or salary, but not in any case to exceed pounds. Preferential Transfers. While the Chamber fully recognises the value of the provision in the Debtors and Creditors Act rendering void any fraudulent or voluntary transfer of property, if made within three months prior to the order of sequestration, it thinks that such provision is not calculated to suit the exigency of many cases which may arise. It is quite possible that a debtor might voluntarily make away with his property in contemplation of insolvency, yet, because he manages to keep without the limit provided by the Act, the property so transferred is lost to his creditors. The Chamber therefore recommends that the Legislature should direct that any transfer not in the ordinary course of business, if made within sixty days prior to the order for sequestration, shall be void, if the effect of such transfer is to prefer one or more creditors to the detriment of the general body. It is also suggested that fraudulent or voluntary transfers should not be rendered void merely because they are made within three months prior to the order of sequestration, but that they shall be deemed void if made at any time upon the assumption that it can be satisfactorily proved that at the time of the making of such transfers the debtors were in insolvent circumstances. Mercantile Assessors. The power vested in the Judges to call in the aid of mercantile assessors has hitherto proved utterly useless. It has never yet been acted upon by the Judges of this province, and there is not the slightest prospect that their Honors will ever ha\e occasion to exercise the power vested in them. Debts Payable in Future and upon Contingencies. The Chamber has been informed that a good deal of doubt exists among some of the members of the legal profession regarding the rights of persons whose claims are payable at a future day or which rests upon contingencies to prove upon an estate where the order of sequestration has been made prior to the arrival of such future day, or the happening of those contingencies. It appears to be also doubtful whether an insolvent debtor who holds property under a lease is discharged from his liabilities upon that lease by his insolvency. The Chamber does not venture to pronounce any opinion upon the soundness of the views just adverted to, but it thinks that it would be far better to set those doubts at rest by clear and specific legislation than to leave them, as at present, purely a matter of speculation. Provision might also be made for deducting a rebate of interest in regard to debts payable in future, and for assessing the value of claims depending upon contingencies or the realisation of securities. Express provision should also be made (as in England) for reserving to a Creditor tbe right of claiming against persons jointly indebted with the insolvent, or who are liable for bis engagements for the difference between the amount of the dividend received and the debt due. Deeds of Arrangement. In the opinion of the Chamber the rights and liabilities of all persons affected by a deed of arrangement should be the same as in Bankruptcy. The Chamber has been informed that until tho year 1861 deeds of arrangement were not valid unless the debtor ceded for the benefit of his creditors all his assets; and that in the year already referred to, provisions were made for legalising Composition Deeds and Letters of License if assented to by the requisite majority of Creditors. The Chamber is also informed that, since the year 1861, the latter class of deeds has been frequently and successfully impugned at home, and more on account of the fact that a greater degree of strictness is requisite in the preparation of that class of deeds than in the class transferring the estate for the benefit of the creditors generally. As the invalidity of any deed of tho kind renders the debtor personally responsible to dissentient creditors, the Chamber suggests that if an assignment of the property of the insolvent for ihe benefit of all the Creditors (coupled with a release to the debtor) is not open to the same objections which may be successfully raised to a Deed of Composition or Letter of License, it would be better, in justice to the debtor, that the Legislature should only sanction Deeds of Assignment. The creditors have also tbe satisfaction of knowing that they have obtained, or possess the means of obtaining, all the property of the debtor; while in the case of Composition Deeds or Letters of License there are many who think that the insolvent is dealing unfairly by them, although they have not the power to resist (assuming the deeds to be valid in point of form) because the necessary majority has assented to such deeds. In drawing these observations to a conclusion, the Chamber cannot but feel that there are many ether topics which might be justly enlarged upon; it does, however, entertain the hope that with the legislation of Great Britain and the neighbouring colonies before it, the Legislature of tliis colony will, at an early period, render the rights and liabilities of both Debtors and Creditors more definite and intelligible than the Act of 1802 succeeded in so doing. R. B. Martin, 30th June, 1865. Chairman.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

No. 39. Mr. Fountain to the Chairman, Chamber of Commerce, Dunedin. Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 20th July, 1805. Sir, —1 have the honor, by direction of the Attorney-General, to acknowledge the receipt of suggestions by the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce on the law relating to Debtors and Creditors, and to thank you for the same. I have. &c, R. G. Fountain, For the Assistant Law Officer, Chairman, Chamber of Commerce, Dunedin. No. 40. Mr. Justice Chapman to the Attorney-General. Sir,— Dunedin, 20th July, 1865. On the 24th of April last, I had the honor to transmit to you some answers to your questions of tho 20th January respecting the operation of the Debtors and Creditors Act; I now desire to add another suggestion. Under the present Act, when once trustees have been appointed, and the estate of the debtor assignee! to them, and the insolvent has beeen discharged at the final hearing, the Court loses all control over the estate, and never bears more of it. To remedy this, I think that the final distribution should be under the control of the Commissioner and of the Court, so as to give to any\_i"editor who feels himself aggrieved by the postponed distribution, to except or object to the {dans of distribution —in the same way that the report of a Master in Equity may be excepted to by any party or person included in a class of practice—for instance a creditor in a creditor's suit where one sues for himself and others. For this purpose no distribution of tbe estate of the debtor should be made until the official assignee has prepared a " plan of distribution, " showing an exact account of balance of the estate. On one side, it should contain all that the assignee has received ; on the other, his costs and commission; and then should follow the plan of distribution of the balance, showing any preferential creditors to be paid in full, such as rent, and the dividend proposed. This plan should be advertised, and should remain open in the Commissioner's office for, say 14 days. During that period, any person aggrieved should be allowed to give to the official assignee notice of objections in writing. If unopposed, the Commissioner should present the plans to the Court at the next day of sitting for confirmation ; and it is in such case confirmed, and the distribution follows. If opposed, tbe official assignee or the creditor, when proof is objected to, shows cause; and, if need be, the plan of distribution is amended in accordance with the decisions of the Court. It is by way of exception to the plan of distribution that the admission or rejection of proof can be brought before the notice of the Supreme Court; and, in the same way, the assignee's charges can be brought under review (see in re Yorston and Webster, 1 Wyatt and Webbs, reports S. C. Victoria Insolvency, pa«e 133, and other cases upon the plan of distribution, pages 77, 86, 65, 100.) The sections of the Act in force in New South Wales and Victoria, 5 Vie. No. 17, and from 87 to 92, all relating to the plan of distribution. I have, &c, The Hon. the Attorney-General. H. S. Chapman. No. 41. The Attorney-General to Mr. Justice Chapman. Sir — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 26th July, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the _oth instant, containing a further suggestion on the law-of Debtors and Creditors, and, in reply, to express the thanks of the Government to your Honor for the same. I have, &c, His Honor Mr. Justice Chapman, Dunedin. Henry Sewell. No. 42. Mr. J. A. Gilfillan to the Attorney-General. Chamber of Commerce, Auckland, New Zealand, 3rd August, 1865. Sir,—l have the honor to enclose herewith the Report of the Committee of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce appointed to consider your letter on the subject of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, and to commend the same to your favorable consideration. I have, &c., J. A. Gilfillan, Chairman, The Hon. the Attorney-General, Wellington.

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

Report by the Committee of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, appointed to consider the Letter of the Attorney-General regarding the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862. The fact that the author of the present Bankruptcy Act has, so shortly after its enactment, confessed that many defects have been found out in the working of it, and has invited suggestions to enable him to amend that law, or to form a new one, may be taken as conclusive evidence of at least two things—l. That the Act referred to has not given satisfaction to the commercial community; and, 2. That he is willing to give effect to suggestions for its alteration or improvement. The Attorney-General's candid acknowledgment of the failure of his measure ought to be appreciated, and advantage taken of the opportunity afforded to give him such suggestions as may enable him to form a measure that will meet the requirements of commerce, and provide a guarantee that the estates of Bankrupt Debtors will bo realised and divided amongst the Creditors in the shortest time and least expensive way. Your Committee have carefully considered the matter committed to them, and are clearly and decidedly of opinion that the present Debtors and Creditors Act should be repealed as soon as possible. The great obstacle to the alteration or amendment of tho English bankruptcy law is the number of officials who are directly interested in its maintenance, and who must in some shape or other be provided for ere any change can be effected. If the present law shall be allowed to exist for some time, the same obstacles will rapidly increase in number and strength, and effectually prevent improvement. The present time, therefore, seems favourable for securing to the Colony a good bankruptcy law. The provisions of the existing Act are inherently bad, and the mode in which its machinery has been worked by its officials has not tended to mitigate or conceal its defects ; and Mr. Sewell, in soliciting the aid of the commercial community, has taken a most judicious step, and one which ought to secure him every necessary assistance. It is with this view that your Committee venture to offer the following remarks and suggestions. It may be advisable, at the outset, to state the general principles which it is thought should form the basis of a well-constructed Bankruptcy Act. These may be summed up thus :— 1. The realisation and division among the Creditors of the estate of a bankrupt with the least possible delay and expense. 2. The placing in the hands of Creditors the estate of their Debtor, with power to wind up that estate in the way most advantageous to themselves. 3. The interposition of the sanction of judicial authority to the acts of the Creditors, so as to legalise their proceedings and give a valid discharge to tbe bankrupt. 4. The prevention, as far as practicable, of fraudulent bankruptcy, by giving publicity to the acts of the Creditors, and inflicting punishment on fraudulent Debtors. The speedy application of the assets of a bankrupt to the liquidation of his debts is the first object to be arrived at. Delay here is generally most ruinous. The value of an estate is seldom increased by putting off a settlement. Loss of interest and increasing expenses are steadily lessening its amounts ; while the annoyance, trouble, and loss of valuable time, are as steadily increasing. A dividend of five shillings per pound to-day is better than a prospect of ten shillings a year hence. Indeed, it would often be wiser to lose a debt at once than have the trouble of l .inning after Official Assignees, and fruitlessly urging them to do their duty. It is, therefore, of importance to have the machinery of a Bankruptcy Act as simple as possible, and its officials as few as may be. And these should have no interest either in increasing expenses or prolonging a settlement. Any change that would secure these desirable ends would meet the requirements of trade, and ought to be adopted. With this view your Committee would call the attention of the Chamber to the provisions of 19 and 20 Vie, c. 79 (vide Law Journal, No. 34), which meet these requirements in a way at once simple, inex pensive, and satisfactory, and would suggest their adoption into the proposed new Act. In Scotland, where that Act has been in operation for many years, there are no judicial establishments separate from the ordinary legal tribunals in which cases in Bankruptcy are tried. These matter are disposed of along with the usual business of the Court. The Judges there are all paid out of the Consolidated Fund; derive no benefit from Bankruptcy or other cases, and have no interest in an increas< of causes. Nor is there a staff of officials, separate from the usual officers of Court, to attend ti Bankruptcy cases. All that the Judges have to do with Bankruptcy cases is to initiate proceedings, and give power and authority to the party named by tho creditors to realize estates and to divide the proceeds among the creditors. Should any legal question arise, either between tbe Bankrupt and the Creditors, or amongst the creditors themselves, and either party should resort to the Court to decide the point, that question becomes an ordinary law-suit; but a preference in time is allowed to bankruptcy cases. When the debtor's estate is wound up, and the party named by the creditors as trustee, as well as the debtor, requires a discharge, a formal report is made to the Court, and, if all is right, a judicial discharge is "ranted. In all other respects tbe judicial and administrative functions are kept apart—the Judges discharging the one, the creditors the other. By that Act, too, provision is made for carrying through sequestrations in the County as well as in the Supreme Courts. And it is important to know that at least 80 per cent, of the bankruptcy cases are can-red through in the Court of the County where the debtor and most of his creditors usually reside. This shows dearly how well creditors attend to their own interests by adopting the least expensive and most expeditious way of recovering the estate of their debtors. Even where sequestration is applied for through the Supreme Court, all the meetings of creditors are held in the couuty town nearest to the debtor's residence, thereby securing local and personal administration of the debtor's estate. In England, also, tbe County Courts have been resorted to, and as far as gone, with satisfactory results. ' The provisions of this Act could easily bo adapted to the local requirements of this Colony.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5.

Your Committee having thus stated tbe loading features of the Scottish Act on the points now under consideration, will next advert to a few of the details of that measure, for the purpose of placing an estate under the management of the creditors. This is necessary for the information of those who may not be acquainted with its provisions and machinery. On presentation of a petition for sequestration, the Judge simply declares the estate bankrupt, and appoints a party to take charge of it till the creditors have time to meet and elect a trustee for that purpose ; and he at the same time appoints a time and place for the creditors to meet. The appointment of a trustee must have the sanction of a majority of the creditors in number and value (and creditors may voto by proxy), and when a trustee is so elected his appointment is confirmed by the Court, and the estate at once vested in him as fully as it was in the bankrupt. The same meeting appoints three of the creditors to advise with and assist the trustee in winding up the estate, investigating claims, and deciding preferences. At the same meeting, and subsequently, it is competent for the debtor to offer a composition on his debts; and if the creditors are satisfied with the offer, it is reported to the Court, and the sequestration is ended without further trouble or expense. Should the offer not be accepted, the trustee goes on to realize the estate and divide the proceeds, without any further interference of the Court. The effect of a judgment sequestrating a debtor's estate is to prevent him doing any more business on his own account, and all transactions within 00 days of the bankruptcy having a tendency to defraud his creditors, or any of them, are illegal. The trus'ee so elected is compelled by the Act to pay the dividends within fixed periods, and before paying these he must submit a scheme of division to the creditors. He must also keep his accounts in a prescribed form, and report at least once a year to an "accountant" appointed by Government to see if the requirements of the Act have been fully complied with. When anything is wrong with the trustee's accounts, the accountant reports the matter to the Court, and the trustee is dealt with as the circumstances of the case may demand. Should he have retained in his hands any funds beyond the stipulated time, or to a greater amount than the Act requires, he is liable to a penalty of 20 per cent, on all sums so retained by him. In regard to the accountant alluded to, it may be necessary to explain that he, like the Judges there, is paid by tho Government, and has no interest in prolonging the existence of a sequestration, or causing additional legal expenses. He attends to all tho sequestrations in the country, and yet the expenses attending the proper discharge of the duties of his office amount to only £1500 a-year. The officer, however, does not interfere with the discretion of the trustee in managing an estate. He only sees the machinery erected by the statute kept in working order ; and, when anything goes wrong, he reports it to the Court. His careful scrutiny of the accounts of trustees has been most beneficial for the creditors, and a similar appointment should be made here. From what has been said, there will be no chance of his duties being confounded with those of an official assignee. When an estate is wound up, and dividends paid, the trustee gives in his final account to the accountant, who reports to the Court that all is according to law ; and thereupon the trustee and debtor are discharged, and the latter may resume business again. There are other details which need not be referred to here. Now, in regard to the expenses of sequestrations under the Scottish Act, it is a well asco rtained fact that these are much less than those in any other country. In England, Earl Russell has stated that the expenses of winding up an estate amounts, on an average, to 42 per cent, of the assets divided. But in Scotland, where the estates are managed by the creditors, the expenses do not exceed 17J per cent, thus leaving 82J to be divided amongst the creditors. As a general rule, at least 75 per cent, of the assets is divided amongst the creditors ; and in the composition contracts alluded to, the whole expenses seldom amount to 6 per cent, of the gross value of the estate. The periods of endurance of sequestrations under the English and Scotch systems is also worthy of notice. In England, there is no proper means of finding out the average time of winding up an estate ; but it is well known that the delay there is so great as to prevent creditors going into the Bankruptcy Court at all, and many of them prefer losing their debts to going there. One witness before the Committee of the House of Commons went as far as to call it a "sink of iniquity." In Scotland, on the other hand, a month or two is all that is necessary in the case of a settlement by composition; and in the general case, a year is considered a long period for a sequestration to continue in operation. It will thus be seen that, under the Bankruptcy Act alluded to, estates of debtors are realized and divided amongst the creditors in the speediest and most inexpensive way ; and this result is attributed to the fact that the creditors manage the estates of their debtors, and it is natural that it should be so. They are most deeply interested therein, and are therefore most likely to see the proceeds thereof realized in the fullest, cheapest, and speediest way. They will not allow any undue delay to take place, nor any unnecessary expenses to be incurred. In this respect, the provisions of the Scottish Act have wrought most beneficially for the commerce of that country ; and they would operate equally well in this colony, and ought therefore, to ;be incorporated into the proposed new Act. Your Committee may, in corroboration of these statements, state, that in the last examination of witnesses by the Committee of the House of Commons which sat on the Bankruptcy Law, every one examined stated that " the general mercantile community of Scotland were satisfied with the law as at present administered there." It is also stated that creditors in that country are not afraid to go into the Bankruptcy Court, because they know that every effort will be made to save everything for the Creditors. Another witness before the same Committee was asked, in regard to the working of the English Act, "In what respect is tbe system objected to ?" And his reply was, "On account of the enormous amount of expenses which it necessarily entails for the winding-up of estates, and because it fails to meet the case of fraud, or anything approaching to fraud —such as fraudulent preference, reckless trading, and the wilful making away with assets." And the same witness adds, " There seems Io be only one way, by general consent, of evading the operation of the Act, and that is generally adopted. I had many such cases, but

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

I never allow them to go into the Court of Bankruptcy if I can avoid it." This is the result of the experience and practice of one thoroughly acquainted with the working of the English system. The AttorneyGeneral's Act is an attempt to introduce the English Bankruptcy Law into this colony; and if it shall be allowed to remain on the Statute Book for any length of time, New Zealand will undoubtedly suffer in similar ways. The remedy for the evils of the English system is, to place the managemeni of the estates of insolvent debtors into the hands of the creditors thereof; and the machinery necessary to wind up these estates in the way most beneficial to themselves ought to be provided by the Legislature. This has been done in Scotland, and that system has received the unanimous approval of the mercantile community of Great Britain ; and a similar Act would have been introduced into England but for the obstacles already alluded to. This colony is at present in a position to take advantage of tli3 experience of the old country. We are not trammelled by old habits, vested interests, or other obstacles to reform. We are free to choose whatever laws we deem most beneficial, and best adapted to the peculiar circumstances in which we are placed; and there being no hindrances in these respects to the introduction of the Scottish Act to this Colony, your Committee would suggest that this course should be recommended to Mr. Sewell and the Government. A few changes of names and phrases would be the only alterations that would be necessary to adapt its machinery to our requirements. Each province could have the right to dispose of its own cases ; but there should be a general register at head-quarters, and the Accountant should be settled where the Government and Supreme Court may be, and the General Government Gazette published. This would be necessary to secure uniformity and regularity in management, and due publicity, so as to guard against fraud and imposition. In a community like that of New Zealand, where large transactions are being carried on between parties residing in the different islands, it is necessary that what takes place in one locality should be known all over the Colony, so that Creditors at a distance, as well as the public generally, may know that a Bankruptcy has occurred, and be saved from further loss and imposition. Under the Scottish system, all this is carefully provided for. The application for sequestration, the meeting for electing a trustee, and the final discharge of the Bankrupt, are published in two or three of the local newspapers, and in the Gazette; and the public, as well as those more immediately interested, are thus informed of what has taken place. The proceedings in Court are also useful in this respect. One other peculiarity of the system alluded to is, that all the proceedings of the trustee are open to the inspection of tbe Creditors, and any one feeling himself aggrieved may appeal to the Court for redress. The Creditors have every facility for ascertaining whether the estate has been properly realised and divided ; and, in fact, the trustee's accounts must be open for inspection a certain number of days before he can divide : and the very fact that the accounts will be thoroughly investigated by parties not only cognisant of, but deeply interested in, everything connected with the estate of the bankrupt, has been found to operate most beneficially in preventing mismanagement on the part of trustees, and fraud on the part of bankrupts. The facility with which fraud can be punished under the Scottish Act is also a useful deterrent in the same way. There are other peculiarities in that Act which might be noticed, such as the simple mode of winding up the estates of small debtors, of deceased debtors, and pauper insolvents ; but it is not necessary to dwell upon these. Nor is it necessary to advert in detail to the defects of the law at present in operation in this Colony, because, if the suggestions made in this report are given effect to, these defects will be obviated. For the same reason the Committee have not thought it necessary to answer categorically the questions put in Mr. Sewell's circular letter of 20ih January last. Every question there put will be answered by the adoption of the Scotch Act. Your Committee, in conclusion, beg to recommend that the present Act be at once repealed; and fhat the Scotch Act, so far as apph'cable ;o the requirements of this Colony, should be made law here. Thos. Macfarlane, Convener of Committee. Mr. Thomas Macfarlane moved the adoption of the Report, and that a copy of it be sent to the Attorney. General. Mr. Webster seconded the resolution, which wa3 carried unanimously. J. A. Gilfillan, Chairman, Chamber of Commerce. Auckland, 27th July, 1865. No. 42. Mr. J. Bathgate to the Attorney-General. Sir,— Dunedin, 7th July, 18.05. Several members of the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce, including Mr. E. B. Cargill and myself, are of opinion that the memorandum sent you by the Chairman is somewhat imperfect, and does not fairly represent the ideas of the members on tbe subject. We think the principle of the Act good, and deprecate any organic change, believing that a few amendments would make it work in a satisfactory manner. I took thelibcrty of stating my own opinion in writing, and in case you may find a hint or two worth your consideration. , I have sent you a copy of the Daily Times of sth July, containing a copy of my letter, and I also enclose another copy gummed on a sheet of paper. I have, &c._ John Bathgate. The Hon. the Attorney-General, Wellington.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

TO THE EDITOR OF THE " DAILY TIMES," (DUNEDIN.) Sir, —I shall be obliged by the insertion of the following letter in your paper of to-morrow: — Sin, — Dunedin, 4th July, 1865. Having a particular engagement this afternoon I will not be able to attend the special meeting of tho Chamber called to consider the suggestions concerning the Debtors and Creditors Act. I therefore beg to offer for the consideration of the Chamber a few remarks in writing. I do not concur with several of the suggestions, and am of opinion that tho Debtors and Creditors Act, as it stands, has received too sweeping a condemnation, and has been held responsible, as it were, for results which no legislation could remedy. We must look to the spirit of speculation engendered by the discovery of the gold-fields to the consequent arrival of many adventurers without means and sometimes without principle, and to the reckless over-trading of the past three years, as the true cause of much of the mercantile embarrassment and insolvency which has recently been seen amongst us. It is a notorious fact, that men who had made discreditable failures in Victoria, and been esteemed there unworthy of credit, have received unlimited credit here both from Banks anil private individuals. It is, therefore, unreasonable to lay the blame of much which has taken place to the door of our colonial law. At the same time, from the working of the present Act many minor improvements will have suggested themselves, and these may be carried out beneficially without involving a radical change in any of the fundamental principles of the statute. Tho framers of the Act seemed to have contemplated such improvements by allowing the Judges to frame regulations and delegate their power. They had overlooked the fact that the Judges would be slow to avail themselves of such a prerogative. The province of Judges is to interpret laws and not to make them, and it is not to be wondered at that our Judges should not put in force the constitutional powers granted to them. If the Judges had availed themselves of the powers entrusted to them many causes of complaint would have been obviated. For example, one well-grounded complaint arises from the delay in the administration of the Act, which might have been avoided by the appointment of local barristers or ths empowering of the Resident Magistrates to carry out the whole of the merely routine business at present performed by tho Judges of the Supreme Court. I would, therefore, suggest that such changes be made in the law as would tend to make its working more expeditious and less expensive, and this may be done now by tho Legislature passing such additional clauses regulating such points concerning which it had previously empowered the Judges to make rules and orders. The Constitution of the Court — The leading principle of any Act should be to distribute a bankruptcy estate as expeditiously and cheaply as possible, and according to the instructions of the creditor's keeping. I most decidedly object to the constitution of an insolvency commission. This would lead to the erection of a separate Court and a staff of officials, all to be supported at the cost of the creditors. In England the Bankruptcy Courts have been bitterly complained against, aad the recent Committee of the House of Commons have exposed scandalous corruption. To remedy the delay arising from the overburdening of the Judges with routine duties, I beg to suggest that the petition may be presented to tho Supremo Court, or to any Resident Magistrate whose order, sequestrating the bankrupt's estate, should vest the same in the Clerk of Court until the first meeting of creditors should be hell for the appointment of a trustee. The Clerk of Court should be empowered, by his assistants to take instant possession of the bankrupt's books, papers, and effects, for safe custody, till a trustee be appointed. An early day should be fixed for the bankrupt's examination, of which duty the Court should be entirely relieved. The examination should be conducted before a Barrister of not less than three years' standing, or a Resident Magistrate. In the realisation of an insolvent estate time is money, and such an immediate examination would be beneficial to tho creditors, although a fee might be payable where it was conducted by a barrister. An early meeting of creditors should take place for the election of a trustee, and when he is appointed bya requisite majority of the Judges, an order confirming the election should, on being registered, vest the whole o" tho bankrupt's estate in the person of the trustee. Who should petition — Any debtor on whom a writ has been served should be able to apply for sequestration, in order to prevent his estate being taken in execution, to tbe prejudice of his creditors generally. The 4th section of the Act should also bo retained. Power should also bo given to any creditor above £50 (or two or more to that amount) to petition where the bankrupt has committed any over-act of insolvency, such as allowing in a writ for a debt being taken iv execution for any debt, calling a meeting of his creditors, suffering any of his real or personal estate to be taken in execution or other legal process, dishonouring a bill and not paying the same within three days after it is due, or in any of the circumstances defined in Section 6 of tho Statute. Provision should be made for sequestration of the estate of a person deceased insolvent, and of a person who has left the Colony in debt. The words, "with intent to defeat or defraud his creditors," in the 6th Section, should be struck out. Where an act can be proved this should be conclusive as to the i ntent. Claims of Creditors — No creditor should be allowed to vote or be ranked unless he has lodged a claim, verified by vouchers where necessary, and with affidavit, and iv every case securities held should be stated and valued, so that t he trustee may claim, if he think proper, the securities, on behoof of the creditors, at the valuation named. I n making up a scheme of ranking, the trustee should give a formal deliverance on each claim, to be intimated to the creditor, who, if dissatisfied, may appeal to the district Judge, where the claim is under £100, and otherwise to the Supreme Court. Bills current and other contingent obligations should be estimated as at the date of sequestration. Discharge — After his examinations the bankrupt may obtain his discharge, with the unanimous consent of his creditors, or, after six months, with the consent of a statutory majority; but, iv the latter case, it should be in the power of any creditor to shew cause (such as fraud, reckless trading, over speculation, irregular book-keeping, delay in balancing beyond a year) why the discharge should not be granted, a discretion

"DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

being left to the Court to delay the discharge. It does not seem expedient to take the power of withholding consent to a discharge from the creditors until the lapse of two years, when the debtor may apply himself for a discharge. Legal Prorelics or References — It is very objectionable that any creditor should have the power by early execution to receive payment from an insolvent debtor to the prejudice of other creditors who, from bills being current or other causes, may not be in a position to follow out judgment. All sheriff's sales before sequestration should but confer a preference, excepting as to costs, and the creditors should be bound to account for the free proceeds apart of the debtor's estate for the benefit of his creditors generally. Special Provision — No Act will afford the remedy desired unless it be efficiently worked. At present an estate gets into the hands of trustees, and, in some cases, is no longer heard of. A trustee should be compelled to declare dividends at stated periods, or give a verbal reason for delay by public notice in the Gazette. An officer should be appointed, to be called " The Auditor in Bankruptcy," whose duty it should be to see that bankruptcy estates are efficiently administered. Trustees should find security to his satisfaction, and render periodical accounts of their acting for his examination and audit. He should decide as to the remuneration to bo allowed, and have power by petition to bring any trustee to the bar of the Court to answer for any irregularity or misconduct. Such an officer, under the title of " The Accountant in Bankruptcy," has been most vigilant in looking after the administration of the Bankrupt Act in Scotland recently, and the results have been most advantageous to creditors. The foregoing are a few of the points which have occurred to me ; and where I have not objected to the suggestions circulated, and where they are not inconsistent with the remarks I have made, it will be understood that I approve of them. Ido not, however, wish it to be understood that the above remarks are at all exhaustive. Many of the suggestions made in the circular are highly important, and many beneficial amendments to the existing statute may be drawn from them. I have, __c., John Bathgate. To the Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, Dunedin. No. 43. Mr. R. G. Fountain to Mr. J. Bathgate. Sir,- — Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 17th July, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 7th instant ; and, in reply, am directed to inform you that the memorandum of the Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce referred to therein has not been received at this office. I have, &c, R. G. Fountain, John Bathgate, Esq., Dunedin. For the Assistant Law Officer. No. 44. Mr. J. Bathgate to the Attorney-General. Sir, — The Bank of Otago, Limited. Dunedin, 20th July, 1865. Since writing you on this subject, I find the Chamber of Commerce had not sent off their Report as I was led to believe had been done. It will probably have reached you ere this, with some amendment, made upon it since I wrote you. It still retains the objectionable commissionership. I enclose you ar_ article from the Money Market Review received by last mail, which gives a summary of the recent report of a Parliamentary Committee on the subject. This may be of use to you. I have, &c, The Hon. the Attorney-General. John Bathgate. No. 43. Mr. R. G. Fountain to Mr. J. Bathgate. g IR _ Attorney-General's Office, Wellington, 26thJuly, 1865. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 20th instant; and, in reply, am directed to thank you for the same. I have, &c, R. G. Fountain, For the Assistant Law Officer. John Bathgate, Esq., Dunedin. No. 4& Mr. C. A. Calvert to the Attorney-General. g IE __ Christchurch, 29th July, 1865. The Insolvency Acts and Bankrupt Acts (of England) provide for Creditors every whcie, of Debtors in custody there, or having resided or carried on business for a certain time immediately preceding there.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—No. 5

Ihesc may be and have been acted upon a3 to Insolvents, persons having resided or carried on business in New Zealand, but incarcerated in England; or I presume as partners who having carried on business, &c , in England. Insolvents discharged, <_c. The vesting order in such cases, I believe, still extend to lands, &0., here or elsewhere "in Her Majesty's dominions," and I believe to other property here made available by further process, if need be. Therefore any Acts of New Zealand, 1 suppose, must be subject to the consequences of any Insolvency and Imprisonment in England, or Bankruptcy in England, anl recourse must be had to the London Gazette as to such, to avoid clashing orders in certain cases. As it is with a view to the Creditors, if any, out of the Province. In Canterbury we have quarterly sittings ;at first hearing the only order is to adjourn hearing for throe months, and mean ime convene a meeting to recommend Trustees. Then at second, called final hearing, although no opposition, still the Court has made orders that subject to rights of Creditors who have expressly proved those who, within six months after that order shall prove to satisfaction of Court or Judge, shall be entitled to dividends. Therefore it is at least twelve months before the Debtor has any assets left. Meantime his duty is to watch the Creditors and Trustees. I am not aware of the existence of any " Insolvency Court" in New Zealand. The Debtors and Creditors Act 1802, by Sess. 11, repealed the oidinances (of 1844 and 1801,) quasi Insolvents Relief Acts, but only for relief of persons imprisoned for debt in New Zealand. The Debtors and Creditors Act 1802, found the Supreme Court of New Zealand provided with Judges and Officers, and adopted it with all its rules, super-adding powers to make further rules! And the Judges have made such rules, including one expressly adopting all former rules. My opinion and suggestions having been asked, I venture to say tbat my opinion is, there should be one such Supremo Court in the Colony ; and that the jurisdiction should be exercised whilst the Islands are one Colony, as at present in each Judicial District, by one or more Judges (one or three Judges, not two) one Registrar, and, if need be, more Deputy-Registrars, as many other officers as need be, exempli gratia receiver at each place of importance. The present Act contemplated delegation of powers under the Act. Such Delegate should be one fit to be a Judge, and, I opine, must be made a Judge of the Court, or but he could not have any security or authority over Registrars and others appointed Her Majesty's servants pursuant to the Supreme Court Act. Grave inconveniences might arise (I think) even as it is, by the powers of the whole Court being at same time in several Judges ; but this by the way. Good Judges are cheapest as well as best. If the Supreme Court were made to consist of three Judges at each district, as it ought to be at least, not only what is now done by the Supreme Court and so-called Court of Appeal, but what is essential in Insolvency and quasi Bankruptcy, might be done, and well done, and all civil actions under £100 and above forty shillings, might be as cheaply, at least, and not less satisfactorily, tried there. Scales of fees, and costs and rules as to small matters might provide all that laws can provide towards justice. But no one set of rules, such as the rules of the Court of Appeal, or the rules of the Supreme Court, or the rules under the Debtors and Creditors Act, or the rules as to testaments or intestates, would suffice as they are at present. They all fall short. The rules of the Court of Chancery as consolidated in 1860, and the rules of the Courts of Law as they existed in 1860, in my opinion, should prevail here. The rules of the Court of Probate, I think, might be adapted to this place ; and the whole course of practice as to probate, administration, insolvency, and bankruptcy, should be made to assimilate as nearly as possible to that in England, as if New Zealand districts of the Supreme Court were districts in England; and, I may observe, probate and administration are not irrelevant to the matter in question, because already more than one of the Debtors and very many of the Creditors who had rights under this Act are dead already, and many intestate estates require rules as to proofs of debt, &c, consistent with rules as to estates of living insolvents. Debtors, or at least debtors and creditors, as it seems to me, can we ignore the laws of England at least, because as I have hinted before, one who is usually resident, or comes on business, in New Zealand, may be insolvent, and in person in England, or made a bankrupt in England on same day as a Court here may adjudicate as to his property and liberty. The Court here could hardly vest, by any order, real property there. The Court there might actually vest all his property there and here, and charge him with felony or misdemeanor there as well as here for something done as to his property including that here. As it is, it seems to me, insolvent acts and bankruptcy acts, as in force 14th January, 1840, may still be in force here ; the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862 is not an insolvency act, or bankruptcy act, sufficiently to repeal an act as to insolvents or as to bankrupts. It appears to me to be all an addition, and leading to confusion. The Court, by Sec. X, has only power to discharge as to " debts, &r.," in the Petition, and as to debts, &C, " specified" in the final order, yet the same section provides, &c, for the benefit of all or any of the Creditors, &c. So Creditors may lake dividends and yet retain all rights, at least so in effect it has been decided in re Atkinson debtor on petition of a creditor here. Section X of this Act seems to me complex and incongruous as it now stands. Petitions by Debtors must have particulars of debts, &c, to be specified again in final orders by reference al least. Petitions by Creditors would not specify any debts, &c, but that of the petitioners. Final orders under these two classes must differ; no rules exist enabling respondent debtors to specify any "debt. &c," in tlia Creditor's petition, or to specify in final order any debts, etc., not proved except as a class.

" DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D—No. .

I think it is not desirable to separate the jurisdiction from that of the Supreme Court, unless where the subject matter, debts or property, might be beneath the dignity of the Court ; certainly liberty cannot be beneath the dignity of any Court de minimis non curat lex ; but of course the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, and a portion of the judicial committee of the Privy Council, would not in certain cases be ousted. Nor should any honest man who is subjected to imprisonment be without a speedy remedy on grounds as at present, that he has no property. The general course here is to give no ad interim protection where by the schedule to Debtor's petition there appears no property. The general course here is to make no order for discharge out of custody before the day of hearing. Thus on petitions so lately filed as not to admit of notice being given under Section IX, before the next day of hearing, (under sec. VIII,) the 14th February Debtors can get no protection nor discharge before 15th May. In cases where the debts and liabilities are less thai what costs of petitions, schedules, affidavits, and solicitors' attendance must amount to £10 at least, whatever the assets, neither vindictive Creditors nor obstinate Debtors should be allowed to waste such assets and the invaluable time of the Court; better leave the Creditor who has been duly diligent to sweep away what there is, aud only limit the time of imprisonment at suit of others to a few days, at utmost until next hearing day. In such cases, I do think the Courts of three Magistrates, acting as o>irts of Justice with express powers, might make orders of discharge nisi at first, and then absolute on terms. But even as to these apparently hopelessly insolvent estates, perhaps vesting orders of what Debtor has at the time, whatever he knows of it or not, as exempli gratia rights under wills or successions, he has not yet knowledge of, might form terms or conditions. General forms of conveyance and assets in trusts might be made and filed, and registered if need required. I would have one deed for reality and one for personality, and register separately, like deeds as to land ami bills of sale. And when the debts or claims in the whole amount to less thau £10, or nt most £100, it is in my bumble opinion only justice. 1 think that Magistrates who have to give judgments should have some (towers of kind hinted at, but I confess myself unable to work this out beyond limiting powers of Supreme Court to giving orders to the effect of vesting assets in any one where debtor's whole liabilities an; less than say £10 or even £100, and especially where his assets are more in value than £100. Contra, if his assets be less than £100, or at least £20, the costs of any proceedings here in any Court would more than compensate for any sort of advantage bis Creditors could get by proceedings. As to book or other dehts due to the Debtors in sums less than forty shillings, to assign even .fc'-eO in amount of such would cost more at least than an ussigiieo would get. In my experience as administrator of the estates of persons deceased, no assignees could got them : whereas, if the Debtor himself were allowed them, conditions might be made that be should pay some part to bis (ireditors ; such orders might be made sans fees, or for little fees, where no doubt arose of honesty of the Debtor. Every honest man should have allowance, as far as his estate would go, as it appears to me : — Ist. For bis wearing apparel, tools, &c. 2nd. For bis subsistence up to the time of his discharge, if required to be in attendance. 3rd. For costs incurred in the endeavour to do justice to all alike. This, when the Court eat. if it did monthly, must at least be £30 or £40; and here, when the Court cannot sit ottener than quarterly, it is more. And honest Debtors out of custody must incur fresh liability, almost exceeding that they sued to be relieved from, unless a limit be placed to the requirements of tbe Court. In England, thirty years ago, I had so ne experience of the then state of misery which one act of bankruptcy put a man into. Honesty was no protection against Creditors to whom he had refused to give preference. Up to the granting of tbe certificate tbe bankrupt Debtor bad to be maintained iv prison although assets existed more than enough to pay eventually 20s. in the pound. Here tne Debtors are stripped of their all. and ordored to at.cud three aud six months hence to be examined, and allowed not even their apparel. By grcaf ahefation of the mips, chiefly, in mv opinion, by always adopting the rules of English Court whose jurisdiction is adopteu, aud omitting all rules copied from those of other Courts whose jurisdiction is not adopted The whole system of so-called s-tiling issues seems to me costly and worse than useless, and a very d.ngerous innovation upon the simple course of law in I .ngland. suitable at the b>4st to parties sans counsel. For Insolvents and Bankrupts, the petitions at first might be. as I think, forms most, part printed. The particulars set out should be only such as to show/>ri__ facie grounds for relief: and where, after due publicity, no one here made any claim or laid any grounds to oppose, upon application to the Court an order might be made at once, either nd interim or final, as tbe Court or Judge might see fit, on terms the Court or Judge might deem just: for example protection as to debts, &0., on the condition of paying interest in the meantime monthly or, &c. and the whole principal or dividends at a rime or times to be limited, or of execution of such a deed, as the Court or Judge should approve, a common form to be printed. This, for honest Debtors, may act less harshly than the present Act. As for dishonest Debtors, lay down by an express Act what is wrong, wnat i* a misdemeanour deserving punishment, ami prosecute them ; but tin not assume insolvency is necessarily a result of dishonesty, taxing every estate for schedules, __c, uyiug vainly by even accounts, balance-sheets, and examinations, viva voce, to extort confessions. If the Judges were three in each place, good rules might be made ; but no Judge likes to set up bis ewu practice as the best, even if it is so; aud, as it is, ouo Judge has not the power alone; one Judge copies

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE

D.—_\o. 5

another. As to the expense, any proceedings which must be by practitioners of the Court, whose time is valuable, must be expensive, and officers of Court must be learned, or they are most mischievous; nor can any laws compel learned men to act as practitioners gratis. In the Magistrates Courts proceedings are perhaps simple; but the expense of witnesses, and the fees to practitioners, who ate barristers or solicitors of Supreme Court (under penalty, &c.) I believe to be nut less than in Supreme Court, and not taxed. I have suggested what would, I believe, simplify proceedings and lessen expense by revision of the rules, or superseding them by enactments. Five or six Judges scattered over the who'e of the Colony may do wonders, and deserve our utmost respect; but the time approaches when they must all want to consult with brother Judges, where there is hardly an amicus curie not to the cause. A Court should be three Judges at least, which makes orders of imprisonment at least until hearing of honest men, however destitute of property. No delegate Judge, even with mercantile assessors, could make new rules '1 he Act will not work itself. I venture most respectfully to suggest the repeal of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862. Re-enact-ment of some such acts for relief of persons imprisoned for debt as that Act repealed by this. 1 cannot pretend to solve at once the problems as to Debtors' and Creditors' conflicting rights, which, I believe, have excruciated tbe Legislature of England up to the present time. In a system of English laws sequestrators are ridiculous, except as mere temporary receivers. Official Assignees are persons fit to be Judges, or useless; they must be advised by lawyers, and ought to have been merchants for a merchant's estate, and so on. They must have competent clerks, and all tbe machinery of books, offices, and tire-proof safes, as required by a large class of traders, machines here costly beyond our means, even where obtainable at all. There are plenty of men who trade, few are at all competent, still fewer to get in a debt without having to go to law. Such is the best opinion I have time to form, aud some suggestions which may evince a desire to be of use. I have, Ac, Christopher Alderson Calvert. The Hon. the Attorney-General. No. 47. The Resident Magistrate, Invercargill, to the Attorney-General. Sir, — Invercargill, Ist March, 1805. 1 have the honor to append my replies on some of the points submitted in your circular of 20th January, 186;_, and at the same time to state, that as I have had little or no experience in Insolvency Law, and but a brief opportunity of observing the operation of the Debtors and Creditors Act 1862, it is with great diffidence I advance any opinion at all on a question so important. 1. I do not see why the Insolvency jurisdiction should not continue to be exercised as at present by the Judges of the Supreme Court being appointed for a district of two or more Provinces, and visiting them in circuit. The constitution of a district insolvency court, with a resident commissioner, or a commissioner holding courts in circuit, would of course be much more satisfactory if not too costly. 8. Resident magistrates might have power to grant interim protection where no fraud is shewn. In this Province the great inconvenience has been that arising from the want of a proper local officer to whom the powers exercisable under the Act might be entrusted. In times of depression like tbat the Province is now passing through, persons embarrassed by debts of small amount, and tbat perhaps only temporarily, who, if they could be protected from arrest by some local authority, would remain, and, in many instances. retrieve their affairs, or, at any rate, would render great assistance to their creditors in realizing their assets, are compelled, by the fear of imprisonment, to abscond ; and this want of local means to give effect to the provisions of the Act makes creditors anxious to use their powers of arrest, and leads to tbe waste and destruction of the debtor's estate; and this has in this Province been brought repeatedly under the notice of the Judges by the grand juries in their presentments. This inconvenience might be remedied by giving resident magistrates power to grant interim protection on terms to be clearly specified by the Statute; and rules of procedure in insolvency cases in Resident Magistrates courts should'also be embodied in the Act. 6. A vesting order, by which the estate would pass at once into the hands of the official assignee, Would be far preferable to the present ad interim sequestration and assignment. 6. At present there is great de_ay before the final appointment of the trustees, an 1, consequently, great -waste of the estate ; there should be an official assignee appointed for each district, to whom the property ol the insolvent might pass immediately on his filing his petitiou. 7. By making it over to the official assignee, by whose hands it would be administered much more carefully and expeditiously than by the trustees as at present —the process ai present bein^ oo lardy mat, by the lime the trustees are appointed, there is lmie oi ihe estate left to divide.

" DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862."

D.—No. 5

10. It would be desirable that as great facilities as possible should be given for taking estates out of Court, and for winding them up under private arrangement; and this seems to be the best safeguard for the speedy administration of the debtor's estate, and would materially diminish the cost attending it. I have &c, Hy. M'Culloch, The Hon. the Attorney-General, Wellington. Resident Magistrate.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE, &c.

This report text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see report in its original form.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1865-I.2.1.5.12

Bibliographic details

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862.", Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1865 Session I, D-05

Word Count

31,871

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862." Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1865 Session I, D-05

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.

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862." Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1865 Session I, D-05

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.

Pages 1-20 of 35

Pages 1-20 of 35

Pages 1-20 of 35

Pages 1-20 of 35

Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

Word Count

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862." Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1865 Session I, D-05

Using This Item

No known copyright (New Zealand)

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE "DEBTORS AND CREDITORS ACT 1862." Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1865 Session I, D-05

Using This Item

No known copyright (New Zealand)