BANKRUPTCY BILL. (Hansard, 4 August 1854)

§ MR. W. WILLIAMS
said, he wished to point out that a great reduction might be made in the present number of Commissioners and Registrars in the Court of Bankruptcy, which was much greater than the amount of business required. There was no reason why there should be five Commissioners in London with salaries of 2,000l., and five Registrars at 1,000l. a year. The whole amount of salaries paid in the Court of Bankruptcy was 59,795l.; besides this, 21,879l. was paid for compensations, 2,600l. for annuities, and 6,316l. for expenses; making in all 90,590l. He thought it would be a great benefit to the country generally, if all these Commissionerships and other offices were abolished, and the business thrown into the county courts. The Judges there were perfectly competent to undertake it, and in most instances their time was not now fully occupied. By this means, too, a sav- 1359 ing to the country would be effected of the 50,795l. at present paid in salaries in the Court of Bankruptcy.

§ MR. GLYN
said, the question of throwing the business of the Court of Bankruptcy into the county courts had been carefully considered by the Commission which had lately sat to consider the subject of the bankrupt laws, but the result to which they came was, that the business of the Bankruptcy Court was entirely unsuited for the county courts, and that the proposition could not be advantageously carried out. He admitted that the expenses of the Bankruptcy Courts were very high, and would still remain so even after the present Bill was passed. The present measure did indeed embody several important suggestions which were made by the Commission of last year. It was, however, but a small instalment of what must hereafter be clone fur the reform of these courts. For instance, it removed many of the obnoxious penal provisions which the present bankrupt law contained, and it gave the Lord Chancellor and Lords Justices power from time to time to introduce regulations with a view to the reduction of the cost of bankruptcy proceedings.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
said, that perhaps it would be satisfactory to the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. Williams) if he informed him that the present Bill was a mere sectional part of a projected reform in the whole law of bankruptcy. The question was connected with the important inquiry into the best method to be employed for the consolidation of the Statute law.

§ MR. W. WILLIAMS
said, that the present Bill admitted that there was no necessity for more than one Commissioner in country districts, and he did nut understand why five Commissioners and five Registrars should be required for London.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
said, he thought that when a vacancy occurred, that would be the proper time fur bringing on the question as to whether or not it should be filled up. It would be unreasonable to expect that any of the learned gentlemen now holding those offices should be deprived of his office because the business of the Court of Chancery had fallen off.

§ MR. MURROUGH
said, he was of opinion that there never was a greater mistake committed than the appointment of the country Commissioners. It was a notorious fact that the large body of creditors resided in London, or in the large 1360 towns, and the greatest inconvenience had been caused to them by the local courts of bankruptcy. To transfer the business in bankruptcy to the county courts would, he thought, be to commit as great an error as was committed when the county Commissioners were appointed.

§ MR. W. WILLIAMS
said, he thought that some provision ought to he introduced into the Bill to diminish the number of Commissioners and Registrars in London when any vacancy should occur.

§ MR. MURROUGH
said, he would now move to insert in the Bill the following words— In order to facilitate the proof of debts, the Lord Chancellor may, by order, appoint one or more of the ushers of the Court of Bankruptcy in London, or any usher of any district Court of Bankruptcy, a Commissioner or Commissioners for the purpose of administering oaths or taking affirmations for the proof of debts in such courts respectively. He thought it desirable that when the Commissioners were engaged in the despatch of the regular business of the Court, their attention should not be distracted by the necessity of administering in open Court oaths to a number of individuals, who might with great convenience be sworn by one of the ushers.

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
said, he thought it important to administer oaths with the greatest possible solemnity, in order to secure respect for thorn; but to allow a mere servant—for such the usher was—to administer the oaths, would assuredly be regarded as a degradation of the function. There was, however, no necessity for legislation on the subject, as by a recent alteration of the law all solicitors in bankruptcy were made special Commissioners, and could receive affidavits.

MR. M URROUGH
said, that the circumstance of a solicitor being enabled to receive affidavits out of Court did not meet the case he had in view, which was that of a vast number of witnesses appearing in open Court and requiring to be sworn. With regard to the objection that the usher was a mere servant, he looked upon that officer to be no more a servant than the judge's clerk in the superior Courts.