EXTENTS IN AID. (Hansard, 22 May 1817)

The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that of late years the great increase in the revenue, and the great concerns in which the government had been engaged, had led to proceedings with respect to Extents in Aid, that it had never been in the contemplation of the legislature or of the courts of law to sanction. The power of extending the operation of extents in aid t6 those indebted to debtors of the Crown, had enabled individuals to put forward their claims in a way peculiarly advantageous to themselves, and this power had certainly of late years been much abused. To remedy this he would now propose to bring in a bill, the principle of which would go to 831 remove the abuse by taking away the temptations which had till now existed. Hitherto the debtor of the Crown had been enabled to take advantage of those who might be debtors to him, and to recover sums by means of extents in aid greatly exceeding those in which he stood indebted to the Crown. He proposed that in future the sums thus recovered should not be applicable to the Crown debtor, but should be exclusively applied to satisfy the demands of the Crown. This practical remedy to the particular abuse it was thought would accomplish the object in view better than a more general revision of the law. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the issues of Extents in Aid.

Mr. Abercrombie
said, that the public were much obliged to the right hon. gentleman for bringing the subject under the consideration of parliament; he was, how-ever, rather inclined to think that this matter might have been more satisfactorily adjusted, by reverting to the ancient law. Until the last twenty years there was no instance of any extent, except in cases of bond debts to the Crown. The only other alteration necessary, might, in his opinion, have been produced by additional regulations on the part of the barons of the exchequer, in order to enforce a more strict definition of the nature of the application, before any extent were allowed to be issued. This he thought might be effected without any interference on the part of the legislature.

The Attorney-General
was persuaded, that if his learned friend were to consider the subject a little more, he would be of opinion that it would not be practicable for the court of exchequer, by any rule of court, to remedy the existing grievances. One of the great evils which the bill was intended to remedy was, that a debt to the Crown, through the medium of an extent in aid, frequently, and sometimes necessarily, procured to the debtor to the Crown, at the expense of the other creditors of his debtor a considerable benefit, of which the Crown did not partake. For instance, if a debtor owed the Crown 500l. and had a debt owing to him on bond of 5,000l. he obtained an extent in aid, by which he seized the whole of that latter sum from his creditor, to the injury of any other creditors which that individual might have. Now, one object of the bill was to prevent the debtor to the Crown from doing this, and to confine the ope- 832 ration of the extent in aid to the precise sum in which he was indebted to the Crown. It was also to be proposed, that the money obtained by extents should not pass into the pocket of the debtor to the Crown, but should be paid at once to the Crown itself. These regulations would materially diminish the inducement to sue out extents in aid. With respect to the supposition of his learned friend, that until late years extents in aid did not issue, except on bond debts, it was unfounded. From the earliest times they had issued on simple contract debts.

§ Mr. Lockhart
observed, that the outline of the measure, as described by the chancellor of the exchequer, was by no means sufficient to remove the evil complained of. The practice of suing out extents in aid, was grounded on a fiction; but according to the proposed measure, that which was a fiction would be made a reality. He thought it a question which deserved serious consideration, whether the kind of extents proposed to be maintained, should be allowed to exist. He hoped that the accumulation of excessive costs would be prevented. He knew an instance of an extent having been issued for 80l., the costs on which amounted to 100l. Besides the costs, the great trouble and embarrassment to which the parties were exposed was a most grievous evil.

Mr. Serjeant Onslow
was aware that the circumstances of the country had rendered great vigilance in the recovery of debts due to the Crown necessary; but still the abuses which existed with respect to I extents in aid ought to be done away. The proposed bill, he hoped, would tend to accomplish that object. As to the question of costs, that was certainly one which deserved to be promptly examined. He could not sit down without expressing that tribute which he thought due to the conduct of the attorney-general, who, as the House well knew, had abandoned an extensive and profitable practice in his profession, in order that he might give the public service the full benefit of his attention. Such instances of zeal in; the public service were rare.

§ Mr. Thompson
hoped, that extents in aid would be confined to debtors in chief. If every surety was allowed to receive extents, that would be a great evil. Something ought to be done to prevent the enormous amount of costs. He knew a county in which the sheriffs had in one year received 10,000l. as costs.