HC Deb 14 August 1883 vol 283 cc522-45

Order for Consideration, as amended, read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered."—(Mr. Chamberlain.)

MR. RITCHIE

said, the principal, if not the only, observation he had to make was with reference to a strong feeling which existed in many quarters as to the great number of appointments which would be made by the Board of Trade under the Bill. It was believed that the patronage which the Bill placed in the hands of the President of that Board—and in saying that he was not speaking of any President of the Board of Trade individually—would be used for political purposes. Athough he himself, at one time, entertained a considerable objection to the amount of officialism imported into this measure, and which he had evinced on the second reading, yet, on further reflection, he hardly felt justified in objecting to the officialism proposed, for the principle of the Act of 1859, that there should be as little officialism as possible, had undoubtedly proved a failure. But in order to secure the successful working of the Bill the Board of Trade must exercise in a very judicious manner the powers conferred upon them, and must refrain from making appointments for political purposes, for he believed that it would be a suicidal policy, and would result in defeating the objects of the Bill. He hoped, therefore, to receive from the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill a declaration that, so far at least as he was concerned, there was no disposition to treat these appointments in a political or Party sense, and that his aim would be to secure the very best men, totally irrespective of Party. He wished to bear his testimony to the great practical success which had attended the efforts of the Grand Committee in reference to the Bill. For his own part, he did not go into the Committee with any strong prejudices in favour of the system; but he felt bound to say that it was a thoroughly business-like Committee, and that it got through its work in a most satisfactory manner. A great deal of the success of the Committee was owing to the eminently practical and conciliatory manner in which the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade managed the Bill from its earliest to its last stage in the Committee.

MR. WHITLEY

said, he was not a Member of the Grand Committee who had sat upon the Bill; but, as representing the large commercial community of Liverpool, he had watched the discussions upon it with very great interest, and he could confirm much that had been said by the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ritchie). The only objection to the Bill by the commercial community which he represented was with reference to the official appointments to which the hon. Member had referred; but he was bound to say that, as far as that had gone, it had been thoroughly thrashed out in Committee. He believed that many of the objectionable features of the Bill had been removed and modified in Committee. He was sure that the House must be very anxious indeed to see this measure tried; and he believed there was also a very general desire throughout the country that it should be tried. He was very glad to be able to confirm what the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets had said with reference to the right hon. Gentleman opposite the President of the Board of Trade. The right hon. Gentleman had met them generally in that friendly spirit, and with that good temper and tact, which no doubt contributed to the successful carrying of the Bill through Committee; and he (Mr. Whitley) hoped they would now, before the evening was over, be able to carry the Bill through its remaining stages.

MR. DIXON-HARTLAND

said, he had also attended all the Sittings of the Committee, and he could also most willingly bear his testimony to what had been said as to the conciliatory spirit of the President of the Board of Trade, and to the business-like way in which the proceedings in Committee were managed. But he was afraid that unless the appointments were made in the most careful manner, and unless the expenses were kept down, this Bill would be as great a failure as its predecessors had been.

MR. NORWOOD

said, it was very gratifying and satisfactory to hon. Members on that side of the House to hear the chorus of commendations from hon. Gentlemen on the other side as to the admirable tact with which the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Chamberlain) had managed the Bill. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that hon. Members on his own side equally recognized the admirable tact he had displayed. It had become evident, at an early part of the proceedings, that the essence of the measure would be the guidance of the Board of Trade; and he (Mr. Norwood) held that, in that regard, the Government had taken upon themselves a great responsibility. Prom the first, his own view of the Bill was that it was too official. At the same time, it must be confessed that the two systems previously tried had undoubtedly failed; and this was a great experiment by which, for the first time, the Government should furnish all the force necessary to realize a bankrupt estate, and he was extremely anxious that the Government should have the greatest possible freedom to carry out their intentions. It was a great advantage that the President of the Board of Trade would have the management of it, and would be able to set in motion the machinery of which he was the author, for if it was possible for such a system to have a satisfactory result it would be under his management. He would watch with interest the result of these experiments, and if they did not succeed he thought this would be almost the last Bankruptcy Bill which the House of Commons would be called upon to consider. The Legislature would then, no doubt, leave debtors and creditors to settle their own affairs without State interference.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, it was very gratifying to him, as the Minister in charge of the Bill, to find the success of the experiment of a Grand Committee so generally admitted by hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House. He concurred in everything which had been said on that subject. He believed there was no doubt that Bills such as that now before the House, which raised no Party feeling, had a better chance of full, careful, and complete consideration before a Grand Committee than they could possibly have in a Committee of the Whole House. He appreciated very highly the kind expressions to himself personally which had fallen from various Members of the House, and said it was with great pleasure that he had found himself working in co-operation with so many hon. Gentlemen well acquainted with the subject, who had brought their intelligence to bear upon the Bill with the object of making it the best possible measure in the interest of the mercantile classes. He was not going to be very sanguine as to the result of this or of any other experiment, when so many experiments, tried by greater men than himself, had undoubtedly failed; but he agreed with the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Ritchie) that if the Bill was to be a success, that result would be attained entirely in consequence of the choice which would be made, in the first instance especially, of the officials who were to carry it into effect, and he could not conceive any policy on his part more suicidal than to allow Party feeling to influence him to such an extent as to prevent the selection of the best possible men. Although, at present, he had hardly had time to consider the exact steps to be taken if the Bill should pass into law, he had already received an immense number of applications for appointments. The places which would be at his disposal would, as he had said on a former occasion, number 50 or 60, and in value they would vary from £200 to as much as £1,500 a-year; yet for these places there were almost innumerable applications, and he looked forward with some alarm to the prospect before him of spending the Recess in considering the several applications. He proposed, in the first place, to make a rough selection, and then to refer the matter to a Departmental Committee, and, to a large extent, found his action upon the recommendation of the Committee. Although he should reserve to himself some control, he hoped to avoid any suspicion of anything like improper Party consideration entering into the selection of the officials. He confessed he was a little disappointed that the hon. Member for Evesham (Mr. Dixon-Hartland) should take a somewhat gloomy view of a measure in which he had taken so great an interest. The hon. Gentleman expressed some fear that the operation of the measure might be expensive. It was, of course, very difficult to know exactly at first what the cost of the working of a complicated scheme of this kind would be; but the further he (Mr. Chamberlain) had gone, and the more information he had been able to obtain, the more he was confirmed in the belief that the original estimate he laid before the House was a correct one, and that the extra charge imposed, although the total cost would be considerable, yet, when spread over the number of estates, it would be small indeed compared with the average charge of the existing system. He hoped to save in other directions a great deal more than the new charges would involve, otherwise the Bill would be a failure.

MR. SLAGG

said, he must join in the congratulations of hon. Members to the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, by whose tact and ability, to a great extent, the Bill had reached its present stage. Of course, he (Mr. Slagg) could not refrain from sharing the fears expressed by many hon. Members opposite that the Bill might, like its predecessors, not come up to expectations; but, on the other hand, they could take comfort from the assurance that they could not be in any worse position under this Bill than they were under the present law. There was no doubt that the methods provided in the Bill were such that they were surrounded by great officialism, and that much depended upon the appointments made in consequence, but, perhaps, not to an extent which would render the measure difficult to work. He looked forward with hope to the operation of the measure; and he trusted the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade would reap the full fruit his labours had deserved.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill, as amended, considered.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

, in moving, as an Amendment, the insertion of the following clause, after Clause 78:— Every trustee shall, at least once in each year during his tenure of office, send to every creditor a statement of his accounts as such trustee, said, that one of the points on which the present Bankruptcy Law failed was that creditors were not informed from time to time of what the position of affairs was; and it was with the object of removing that objection that he proposed the clause.

New Clause (Trustee's statement of account,)—(Sir John Lubbock,)—brought up, and read the first time.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be read a second time."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he hoped his hon. Friend, in the interests of economy, would not press the clause; and he did so with all the more confidence, because he agreed entirely with the object in view. If they had to deal only with the mercantile community, members of which signed the Petition presented on this subject, he should at once assent to the insertion of the clause; but the hon. Baronet hardly made sufficient allowance for the difficulties surrounding a Bill in which they had to deal, not only with very large transactions, but with an immense number of small affairs. In the case of small matters, the chief object of the Bill was to prevent large expense. He had offered to his hon. Friend, and was willing to renew his offer, that when the Bill became law he would undertake to make rules for the guidance of the Official Receivers and other officials of the Board of Trade, to insure, among other things, that in all cases of magnitude there should be such an annual report from the trustee to the creditors as his hon. Friend desired. What was done was to allow the Board of Trade a very considerable amount of discretion, in order that it might "temper the wind to the shorn lamb."

MR. WHITLEY

said, he was quite satisfied with the promise of the right hon. Gentleman to introduce rules under the Act.

Question put, and negatived.

Clause 4 (Acts of bankruptcy).

MR. WARTON moved an Amendment to limit the sub-section, making it an act of bankruptcy if an execution issued against a person had been levied by seizure and sale of his goods, under process in an action, by inserting the words "for a sum not less than £20."

Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 6, after the word "him," to insert the words "for a sum not less than twenty pounds."—(Mr. Warton.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he could not accept the Amendment. The point was much discussed in the Grand Committee, on the point that a limit was formerly imposed which a Committee of the House recommended should be abrogated, and an Amendment on the subject was rejected by three to one.

MR. WHITLEY

hoped his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Bridport (Mr. Warton) would withdraw his Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 7, to leave out the words "under process in an action."—(Mr. Arthur 0'Connor.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. DIXON-HARTLAND

, in moving, as an Amendment, to insert after Sub-section (e) a further sub-section making it an act of bankruptcy if the petitioning creditor had served the debtor with a writ specially endorsed, and also a bankruptcy notice to pay the amount endorsed on the writ, and the debtor had failed to comply with the notice within 14 days, said, its object was to provide a summary process against fraudulent debtors, which did not at present exist. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would assent to it, or something in the same direction, as the omission of some such clause would be a great blot on the Bill, seeing that it was necessary in order to prevent a debtor from making away with all his goods and collecting the money for them, and then getting off to Spain or elsewhere, and so be lost sight of.

Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 9, after the word "himself," to insert the words— (f.) If the petitioning creditor has served on the debtor a writ specially endorsed with the particulars of the demand sought to be recovered in an action in the High Court of Justice wherein the creditor claims payment of a sum amounting to not less than fifty pounds, and has also served on the debtor in England, in the prescribed form at, or at any time after the date of the service of the writ, a bankruptcy notice in writing in the prescribed manner, requiring him to pay the amount endorsed upon such writ, or to secure or compound for it to the satisfaction of the creditor, and he does not within fourteen days after the service of such notice comply with the requirements thereof: Provided, That no bankruptcy petition shall be presented on the ground of this last mentioned act of bankruptcy unless the creditor shall have obtained final judgment in the action for a sum of not less than fifty pounds within three months from the service of the specially endorsed writ."—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, that the subject of the Amendment was fully discussed in the Grand Committee and negatived; and he, therefore, hoped the House would not feel themselves inclined to reverse their decision. The Amendment really proposed to restore, in some form or other, the old proceeding of trader-debtors' summons, which would be very objectionable. In 1879 a Committee of that House unanimously agreed that the trader debtor summons had been so much abused that it ought to be abolished. Moreover, the procedure which the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Dixon-Hartland) suggested would not enable a creditor, who feared he might be defrauded, to arrest a debtor before he got away, because he proposed that the debtor should have 14 days to comply with the service. He must be a very poor debtor indeed if he could not get away to Spain, or elsewhere, within that time. But the debtor might be an honest man, and might be pursued by an extortionate creditor. In fact, that was what the Committee of 1879 found was the case. The hon. Gentleman had asked him whether he could not do something in the same direction. Well, he had considered the matter carefully, and he thought he might be able to accept a subsequent Amendment of the hon. Member on Clause 25, which dealt more particularly with the absconding debtor. When they came to that clause he would accept the Amendment, which would, at all events, quicken the process of the Courts. Further than that he could not go.

MR. WARTON

said, the fact that that subject was discussed in the Grand Committee was no reason why it should not be discussed hero. The House itself was superior to any Grand Committee, even the grandest.

MR. WHITLEY

said, he quite agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade that the old law was often made use of for purposes of extortion, and that the Amendment would not effect the object the hon. Member for Evesham (Mr. Dixon-Hartland) had in view.

MR. GREGORY

, with reference to the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Chamberlain), said, that he (Mr. Gregory) was a Member of the Committee of 1879, as well as of the Grand Committee; and it was beyond doubt that the process of trader-debtors' summonses did give rise to great abuses, and was made a means of preference.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments made.

Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 17, to leave out the word "seven," in order to insert the word "fourteen,"—(Mr. Warton,)—instead thereof.

Question, "That the word 'seven' stand part of Bill," put, and agreed to.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

, in moving, as an Amendment, to insert the words "reduces the judgment debt to an amount less than the sum necessary to support a petition," said, that, as the clause stood, if a creditor had obtained a final judgment, and the debtor failed to satisfy the Court that he had a counter-claim equal to or exceeding the sum of the judgment debt, he might be made a bankrupt. He thought that was going further than was necessary.

Amendment proposed, In page 2, line 22, to leave out from the word "which," to the word "and," in line 23, in order to insert the words "reduces the judgment debt to amount less than the sum necessary to support a petition,"—(Mr. Arthur O'Connor,) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he thought the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) had been confusing two things which were different. The amount of the judgment debt was one thing; the amount of the debt on which the creditor might found a petition was something quite different, and there was no relation between them. According to the Bill, a judgment debt of any amount constituted an act of bankruptcy. A counter-claim of any less amount would leave the judgment debt unsatisfied.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

, in moving, as an Amendment, to insert words making it an act of bankruptcy to execute a bill of sale over stock in trade without having paid for the same, said, that, though he agreed with the principle of doing away with the distinction between traders and non-traders, he thought it ought to be maintained in this respect.

Amendment proposed, In page 2, line 29, after the word "debts," to insert the words—"(h.) If he executes a hill of sale over any portion of his stock in trade without having paid for the same."—(Mr. Arthur O Connor.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERAIN

said, this was also a matter in which he must again ask the House not to reverse the decision already arrived at. It had been discussed at great length in the Grand Committee, on the Motion of the hon. Member for Queen's County; and the Amendment had been negatived by 45 to 6. An Act had been passed which limited the possibility of such bills of sale as the hon. Member had in his mind, and he did not think it desirable to go further. But the term "bill of sale" included many other things than what was commonly understood by the term; and if the Amendment was accepted, it would lay down a hard-and-fast rule, which would cause an immensity of inconvenience. The term included hypothecations of cotton, and the Amendment would have the effect of making almost every merchant in Liverpool bankrupt the moment the Bill became law, as the mode of transacting business on 'Change at Liverpool was of such a character that it came under the Bills of Sale Act; and that, he thought, was a sufficient reason why the hon. Member should have been content with the decision the Grand Committee came to, without bringing the matter up again.

MR. BIGGAR

said, that, though he did not altogether approve the Amendment, he thought that the facility for giving undue preference by bills of sale should be restricted. It was unfair that a man should be able to make one creditor right at the expense of another.

Question put, and negatived.

MR. WAUGH

, in moving the insertion of words making the estate of the bankrupt vest in the Official Receiver on the making of the order of bankruptcy, pending the appointment of the trustee, said, the object of the Amendment was to put an end to the expense of restraining and other orders, which would probably add £50,000 a-year to the cost of the bankruptcy proceedings.

Amendment proposed, In page 2, line 36, after the word "estate," to insert the words "and the estate of the debtor shall, on the making of such order, vest in the official receiver for the time being of the said court."—(Mr. Waugh.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER HERSCHELL)

said, the Government quite appreciated the object and advantages of the proposal, and would admit that it would save certain difficulties; but it should be borne in mind that, on the other hand, certain liabilities would be placed upon the Official Receiver which would be highly undesirable, for he was the mere interim protector of the estate until the trustee was appointed by the creditors. It would be impossible for the Government, consistently with the whole scope and framework of the Bill, to accept the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 6 (Conditions on which creditor may petition).

MR. WAUGH

, in moving, as an Amendment, to leave out from ("1") to paragraph ("b,") and to insert— Any two or more creditors, or any judgment creditor, who has complied with the provisions of the 4th section of this Act, shall be entitled to present a petition against a debtor, but no petition shall be presented unless, said, that he did not like the distinctions laid down in the clause. If a man could not pay small debts, he certainly could not pay large.

Amendment proposed, In page 2, line 37, to leave out from the word "estate," to the word "and," in line 42, in order to insert the words "Any two or more creditors, or any judgment creditor, who has complied with the provisions of the fourth section of this Act, shall he entitled to present a bankruptcy petition against a debtor, but no petition shall he presented unless,"—(Mr. Waugh,) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, that this matter had been also discussed before. In the Grand Committee, the proposal was made to reduce the amount to £20; but objection was taken to it on the ground that it would lead to extortion. He did not think it would be desirable to make the proposed alteration. No serious objection had been taken to the working of the system, which was to be continued under this sub-section.

Question put, and agreed to.

MR. WARTON

, in moving, as an Amendment, after "petition," to insert "set out the particulars of his security, and the true considerations therefor, and," said, it seemed to him that the petitioning creditor should state at once that he came forward as a secured creditor, and also state the considerations for the security.

Amendment proposed, In page 3, line 10, after the word "petition," to insert the words "set out the particulars of the security and the true consideration therefor, and."—(Mr. Warton.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he would point out to the hon. and learned Member opposite (Mr. Warton) that this was too early a stage to ask those particulars from the petitioning creditor, though it might be desirable to do so afterwards.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

, in moving to amend the clause by the insertion of the words— But he shall, on an application being made by the trustee, within the prescribed time after the date of the adjudication, give up his security to such trustee for the benefit of the creditors upon payment of such estimated value, said, that the Amendment was also considered in the Grand Committee. It was withdrawn after a short discussion, but with the intention, on his part, of submitting it to the House as a Court of Appeal against the Grand Committee, which consisted only of one-tenth of the House of Commons; and of which 20 formed a quorum. Sometimes the Committee stopped its proceedings because it had not a quorum; and certain hon. Gentlemen, during the discussion of the Amendment he had referred to, waited in order to obtain the opinion of the President of the Board of Trade upon it, and then voted the way they thought the right hon. Gentleman wished them to vote. ["No!"] He merely proposed to insert in the Bill certain words which were in the Act of 1869, but had been left out quite gratuitously, and without any explanation of the why or the wherefore, the Government simply declining to accept the proposal. The clause dealt with the presenting of a petition by a creditor; and it provided that, if he were a secured creditor, he should state whether he was willing to give up his security for the benefit of the estate generally, or give an estimate of the value of his security. The Schedule of the Bill also provided that, in the case of proof of debt, there should be a similar option, and a mistake as to the value rendered the creditor liable to penalty. He thought what was reasonable in the case of proof was reasonable also in the case of the presentation of a petition; and he would, therefore, move his Amendment.

Amendment proposed, In page 3, line 16, after the word "creditor," to insert the words "but he shall, on an application being made by the trustee, within the prescribed time after the date of the adjudication, give up his security to such trustee for the benefit of the creditors upon payment of such estimated value."—(Mr. Arthur O'Connor.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, that the reason for the proposed change in the law was very fully explained in the Grand Committee. If the Amendment of the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) were accepted, a creditor might be called upon to value his security at a very early stage of the bankruptcy proceedings. There were many kinds of security which, even to a banker, were very difficult to value, and a creditor might know that his security reached the limit of £50 required by the Bill to enable him to petition, without knowing what the exact value was; and it would be unfair to call upon a creditor to estimate the value at this early stage, and bind him to give up his security at any time afterwards at that value, or to subject him to heavy penalties if his estimate was erroneous.

MR. GREGORY

said, he wished to state that, in his opinion, this question had been very fairly and fully discussed in the Grand Committee; and he protested against the statement of the hon. Member (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) that Members of the Grand Committee voted in accordance with the wish of the President of the Board of Trade. He (Mr. Gregory) thought the Amendment was clearly open to the objection taken by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Chamberlain).

Question put, and negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 12 (Power to appoint special manager).

MR. WAUGH moved to amend the clause, by taking from the Official Receiver, and conferring on the Court, the power of appointing a special manager to act until a trustee was appointed, in order to avoid making the Official Receiver a judicial officer and Judge, as it were, in his own cause.

Amendment proposed, In page 5, line 1, to leave out the words "official receiver of a debtor's estate," in order to insert the word "Court,"—(Mr. Waugh) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, that the Amendment was totally opposed to the whole principle of the Bill; and he hoped the hon. Member for Cockermouth (Mr. Waugh) would not consider him wanting in respect, if he declined to argue again a matter which had been so fully discussed in the Grand Committee.

In reply to Mr. WHITLEY,

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER HERSCHELL)

said, that the appointment of special manager would have to be made without delay, and that time would be lost in going to the Court.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 16 (Debtor's statement of affairs).

Amendment proposed, In page 6, line 12, to leave out the word "three" in order to insert the word "seven,"—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland,) —instead thereof.

Question, "That the word 'three' stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Amendments made.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 28 (Discharge of bankrupt).

MR. DIXON-HARTLAND

moved to insert as one of the conditions on which the order for discharge might be refused or suspended, the following:— That the bankrupt has drawn or accepted accommodation bills upon which the words 'for value received' are written, when no such value has passed.

Amendment proposed, In page 16, line 6, after the word "it," to insert the words,—"(d.) That the bankrupt has drawn or accepted accommodation bills upon which the words 'for value received' are written, when no such value has passed."—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he could not accept the Amendment; first, because he did not think it would be operative; and, second, because he could not see why accommodation bills should be necessarily bad.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, he sympathized to some extent with the Amendment; but he did not think they would be justified in making so important a change in the present condition of the House; and he, therefore, hoped the Amendment would not be pressed.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 30 (Effect of order of discharge).

Amendment proposed, in page 17, line 31, after the word "liability," to insert the words "which he has."—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments made.

MR. EDWARD CLARKE (for Mr. STUART-WORTLEY) moved to amend the clause by providing that an order of discharge, printed before or after the passing of the Act, should be deemed to have released the bankrupt from all debts and liabilities, from which he would be released by an order of discharge under this Act.

Amendment proposed, In page 17, line 36, after the word "bankruptcy," to insert the words "and an order of discharge granted before or after the passing of this Act shall be deemed to have released and shall release the bankrupt from all debts and liabilities from which he would be released by an order of discharge under this Act."—(Mr. Edward Clarke.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he quite sympathized with the intention of the hon. and learned Member, which was to meet some very hard cases which had come under his notice. The effect, however, of the Amendment would be to render the Bill retrospective, and he could not accept it.

Question put, and negatived.

Amendment proposed, In page 18, line 7, after the word "him," to insert the words "from any debt or liability other than debts or liabilities incurred only by personal fraud or fraudulent breach of trust on the part of the bankrupt, and not on the part of such partner, co-trustee, joint contractor, or surety, and debts or liabilities whereof the bankrupt has obtained forbearance by his own personal fraud, and not wholly or partly by the fraud of such partner, co-trustee, joint contractor, or surety."—(Mr. Edward Clarke.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 40 (Priority of debts).

On the Motion of Mr. BROADHURST, the following Amendments made:—In page 22, line 17, after "workman," insert "not exceeding fifty pounds;" and in line 19, leave out "two," and insert "four."

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 47 (Avoidance of voluntary settlements).

Amendment proposed, In page 25, line 39, to leave out the words "if the settlor becomes bankrupt within two years after the date of the settlement be void against the trustee in bankruptcy, and shall."—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 55 (Disclaimer of onerous property).

Amendment proposed, In page 31, line 6, to leave out the words "as to the court may seem equitable," in order to insert the words "the amount of such damages to be estimated by the difference between the contract price and the price at which a similar contract could be entered into at the date of the act of bankruptcy,"—(Mr. Ritchie,) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed, In page 31, line 41, at end of Clause, to insert the words—"And provided further, That the court may, upon application made before the expiration of the periods hereinbefore allowed for disclaimer and, after hearing the persons interested in such property extend the said periods within which the trustee may disclaim property upon such terms and conditions, including the payment by the trustee of such costs and other sums as to the court may seem fit."—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER, HERSCHELL)

said, the point contained in the Amendment was receiving the attention of the Government.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, he wished to point out an objection which had been raised to the provisions in the Bill relating to the liability of trustees; and though he did not then press the objection, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade would see his way to take the matter into consideration.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he thought there was something in the objection of the hon. Baronet, and that it would, at all events, be desirable to limit the personal liability of trustees in the matter. The Government had had it in contemplation to insert words to provide for that, but had not at present come to any decision. All he could say at present was, that they were entirely at one with his hon. Friend with regard to the objection; and probably in "another place" words would be inserted.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 66 (Appointment by Board of Trade of official receiver of debtors' estates).

MR. R. N. FOWLER (for Mr. RAIKES) moved an Amendment with the object of placing a large portion of the patronage which would arise under the Bill in the hands of the Court of Bankruptcy and the County Court Judges, by giving them the appointment of Official Receivers.

Amendment proposed, In page 36, line 3, to leave out sub-section (1), and insert the words—"A proper person or persons shall be appointed for each district to act as official receiver or receivers of debtors' estates. Such persons shall be appointed, as regards the London Bankruptcy Court, by the judge of that court, and, as regards other districts, by the judge of the County Court having Bankruptcy jurisdiction within that district. One person only shall he appointed for each such district, unless the Board of Trade shall otherwise direct, and the same person shall not be appointed for more than two districts. The official receivers shall act under the directions of, and may he removed by, the Board of Trade, but shall also be officers of the courts to which they are respectively attached,"—(Mr. R. N. Fowler,) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he could not accept the Amendment, which would create much confusion. The appointment would rest with one tribunal, and their dismissal with another—namely, the Board of Trade. The whole success of the Bill would depend on the control which Parliament and the country would have over the Board of Trade.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 70 (Duties of official receiver as to debtors' estate).

On the Motion of Sir JOHN LUBBOCK, the following Amendment made:—In page 37, after line 42, insert— That when the debtor cannot himself prepare a proper statement of affairs, the official receiver may, subject to any prescribed conditions, and at the expense of the estate, employ some person or persons to assist in the preparation of the statement of affairs.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 74 (Payment of money into the Bank of England).

On the Motion of Sir JOHN LUBBOCK, the following Amendment made:—In page 40, after Sub-section (4), insert— (5) Subject to any general rules relating to small bankruptcies under Part VII. of this Act, where the debtor at the date of the receiving order has an account at a bank, such account shall not be withdrawn until the expiration of seven days from the day appointed for the first meeting of creditors, unless the Board of Trade, for the safety of the account, or other sufficient cause, order the withdrawal of the account.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 82 (Release of trustee).

Amendment proposed, In page 42, line 15, to leave out the words "in his opinion," in order to insert the words "in the joint opinion of himself and of the committee of inspection,"—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland,) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 89 (Discretionary powers of trustee and control thereof).

Amendment proposed, In page 44, line 26, after the word "creditors," to insert the words "who have proved their debts."—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 102 (General power of bankruptcy courts).

Amendment proposed, In page 48, line 41, after the word "fact," to insert the words "and whether involving or not involving issues of fraud or amounts exceeding fifty pounds."—(Mr. Stuart-Wortley.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 116 (Disabilities of officers).

Amendment proposed, In page 52, line 38, after the word "solicitor," to insert the words "in the court of which he is an officer."—(Mr. Waugh.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 122 (Power for county court to make administration order instead of order for payment by instalments).

MR. WHITLEY (for Mr. BOURKE)

moved an Amendment to omit the words "household goods" from the provision in the clause enacting that the household goods, wearing apparel, and bedding of the debtor or his family, and the tools and implements of his trade, to the value of £20, should to that extent be protected from seizure.

Amendment proposed, in page 55, line 19, to leave out the words "household goods."—(Mr. Whitley.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

MR. BROADHURST

hoped the Government would adhere firmly to the Bill as it stood. The subject had been thoroughly thrashed out in Committee, and no Division had been taken upon it.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he certainly thought it would be undesirable to alter the clause.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 127 (Power to make general rules).

MR. LEWIS FRY

, in moving, as an Amendment, to add to the clause the following sub-section:— No general rule under the provisions of this section shall come into operation until the expiration of one calendar month after the same has been made and issued, said, the clause provided for the making of general rules for carrying into effect the objects of the Act; and the aim of his Amendment was to secure that the rules should be in the hands of the public a reasonable time before they came into operation, in order that legal practitioners and the public might become acquainted with them before they had to act upon them.

Amendment proposed, In page 59, line 14, after the word "proceedings," to insert the words—"(5.) No general rule under the provisions of this section shall come into operation until the expiration of one calendar month after the same has been made and issued."—(Mr. Lewis Fry.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, it would be the object of the Board of Trade to give as long a notice as it could of the general rules which, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor, it was authorized to make; but the Act was to come into operation on the 1st of January next, and it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to prepare a great body of rules before the end of November, as would have to be done if the proposed Amendment were accepted. He would, however, endeavour to take care that the first set of rules should be in the hands of all concerned a reasonable time before the Act came into force. Then, as regarded all future rules, he would not object to come under a statutory obligation to give a certain notice. He would, therefore, suggest to his hon. Friend the Member for Bristol (Mr. Lewis Fry) that he should accept an amended form of his Amendment in these terms:— After the commencement of this Act no general rule under the provisions of this section shall come into operation until the expiration of 14 days.

MR. LEWIS FRY

said, after the assurance given by the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, he was willing to accept his suggestion.

MR. EDWARD CLARKE

said, he thought it was rather a serious outlook if the first set of rules were to come into operation on the 1st of January, and if the right hon. Gentleman could not have them ready by the end of November. Either the commencement of the Act ought to be postponed, or pressure ought to be put on the Government Department to get the rules ready earlier. Besides, 14 days was too short a period for people to become acquainted with the provisions of the Act; and he saw no reason why a month's notice should not be given; and he, therefore, hoped that the Amendment would not be withdrawn.

MR. STUART-WORTLEY

said, he also thought 14 days too short.

MR. GREGORY

said, he would suggest that the operation of the Act might be postponed by means of the rules.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER HERSCHELL)

said, he thought it desirable the Act should commence on the 1st of January. He would promise, on behalf of his right hon. Friend, that the bulk of the rules should be ready by the end of November; but they would require to be supplemented by others.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed, In page 59, line 14, after the word "proceedings," to insert the words—"After the commencement of this Act no general rule under the provisions of this section shall come into operation until the expiration of fourteen days after the same has been made and issued."—(Mr. Chamberlain.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, to leave out the words "fourteen days," and insert the words "one month,"—(Mr. Edward Clarke,)—instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words 'fourteen days' stand part of the said proposed Amendment."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, the matter was not worth arguing about; but if the hon. and learned Member insisted on it, he would accept the Amendment as amended.

MR. H. H. FOWLER

hoped the President of the Board of Trade would not accept it.

Question, "That the words 'one month' be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

Question, That the words 'after the commencement of this Act no general Rule under the provisions of this section shall come into operation until the expiration of one month after the same has been made and issued,' be inserted after the word 'proceedings,' in page 59, line 14, put, and agreed to.

Clause 154 (Power to abolish existing offices).

MR. GREGORY

, in moving to add after Sub-section 2 a Proviso that any person who, at the passing of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, held his office during good behaviour, should, in the event of the office being abolished, be awarded the same compensation as if his office had been abolished under the said Act, said, that, in his opinion, it was hard that persons holding office under the former Act should now lose their right to compensation.

Amendment proposed, In page 65, line 24, after the word "reasonable," to insert the words—"Provided, That any-such person who, at the passing of 'The Bankruptcy Act, 1869,' held his office during good behaviour, or during good behaviour subject only to removal by the Lord Chancellor by order, for some sufficient reason to be stated in such order, shall, in the event of the office being abolished, be awarded the same compensation as if his office had been abolished under the said Act."—(Mr. Gregory.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he did not see any great hardship in the matter. By the Act of 1869 lavish compensation was provided. The officers under that Act did not choose to take advantage of it then, and now they asked for the same lavish compensation in 1883. The principle of the Act of 1869 was one the Government did not desire to follow.

MR. STUART-WORTLEY

asked the right hon. Gentleman if he could give an estimate of the salaries of the offices abolished, and of those created by this Bill?

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

, in reply, said, the matter was discussed on the Motion for the Consideration of the Bill, when the hon. Member was not in his place. He (Mr. Chamberlain) had estimated that the total salaries of the Official Receivers and the staff of the Board of Trade would be between £50,000 and £60,000 a-year, and new credits would have to be taken in the Audit and Control Departments. As to the salaries of the offices abolished, he could give no information; but the abolition would be trifling, as most of the persons holding those offices would perform the same or analogous duties.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 155 (Performance of new duties by persons whose offices are abolished).

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, it was provided by the clause that it should be obligatory on the Lord Chancellor to appoint any person whose office was abolished to some other office under the Act for which he was competent. He would propose, as more desirable, an Amendment that the Lord Chancellor "may" do that.

Amendment proposed, in page 65, line 28, to leave out "shall," and insert "may."—(Sir John Lubbock.)

Question proposed, "That the word 'shall' stand part of the Clause."

MR. H. H. FOWLER

, in opposing the Amendment, said, the intention of the clause was, that there should be no option to the Lord Chancellor in the matter.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir FARRER HERSCHELL)

said, he fully concurred with the hon. Baronet (Sir John Lubbock) in the desirability of inserting the Amendment.

Question put, and negatived.

Word substituted.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 168 (Interpretation of terms).

Amendment proposed, In page 70, line 11, after the word "taken," to insert the words "or where the trustee resides or carries on business."—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 169 (Repeal of enactments).

Amendment proposed, In page 71, line 6, to leave out the words "passing of this Act," in order to insert the words "thirty-first day of December one thousand eight hundred and eighty-three,"—(Mr. Dixon-Hartland,) —instead thereof.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.