MR. T.W.RUSSELLwished to know, for the convenience of several Irish Members who wished to return to England to take part in the discussion of the Irish Votes, when those Votes would be taken?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir W. HARCOURT,) DerbyOn Thursday.
- 1. "That a sum, not exceeding £25,680, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Her Majesty's. Secretary of State for the Colonies, including certain Expenses connected with Emigration."
809 - 2. "That a sum, not exceeding £7,533, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council and for Quarantine Expenses."
- 3. "That a sum, not exceeding £108,090, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade and Subordinate Departments."
- 4. "That a sum, not exceeding £16, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for meeting the Deficiency of Income from Fees, &c. for the requirements of the Board of Trade, under the Bankruptcy Acts, 1883 and 1890, and 'The Companies (Winding-up) Act, 1890.'"
MR. T. H. BOLTONsaid, it might be in the recollection of the House that at the commencement of this year he had asked a question with reference to a subject which was of very great interest to a large class of poor people throughout the country. An article published in The Daily Chronicle on January 17 last contained this statement—
There is reason to believe that the Board of Trade has been creating, without anybody except its oppressed victims knowing of it, a new, and we do not hesitate to say, abominable industry in this country to the grievous oppression of the poorer classes. It is that of the speculative debt collector, who buys a bankrupt's book debts from the Board of Trade, and then fastens like a vampire on the wretched debtors, persecuting them, even though they be struggling in the direst poverty, with every engine of extortion known to the law.That was very strong language, but it was not stronger than the traffic in small book debts deserved. This traffic arose in connection with the realisation of assets by Official Receivers, and it had been carried on to a considerable extent, especially in the County Courts which had bankruptcy jurisdiction. The Official Receivers, after collecting the good debts of estates, put the very doubtful and bad debts together and sold them for what they would fetch. The result was that debt collectors and persons doing work in the County Courts found it worth their while to buy these parcels of book debts, having more than ordinary facilities for enforcing payment. He had in his possession particulars of several such cases. In one 810 case—that of Marianne Denne, of Pontypool—book debts amounting to £800 were sold by the Official Receiver to the highest bidder for 40s., and no less a sum than £400 had been screwed out of the unfortunate debtors, many of whom were in a state of great poverty. Even up to this date defendants were constantly being brought up for judgment and summonses and executions were being taken out. He was supplied with other cases. In one case the assignee of the debt sued for £9 7s. 6d., in which he got an order for 4s. a month, involving 15s. poundage, the defendant being an unfortunate widow. In another case the judgment was given in 1883 for £8 3s. 5d., on which an order was made for 5s. a month—£2 12s. 3d. had been paid into Court. There were some costs and expenses, and the amount ordered to be levied was £5 7s. 6d. Execution had been issued. In another case the sum of £13 13s. 7d. was ordered to be paid by 4s. a month, and the poundage fees were one guinea. The latest judgment he had was in February, 1893. His correspondent described this as "a nefarious traffic," and he had extracts from the local papers which expressed themselves in the strongest language on the matter. Only on the previous evening he had a conversation with a distinguished County Court Judge in the South of England on the subject, and that gentleman told him that the practice was simply abominable, and that he did what he could to mitigate it by refusing to issue execution, or by spreading payments over a considerable period. Steps ought to be taken to alter the law in order to prevent Official Receivers selling book debts which ought to be wiped off as bad, and which would be treated thus by any respectable trader. The Official Receiver, of course, was in a difficult position. Unless he had distinct authority from headquarters to the contrary, he might consider it to be his duty to sell book debts in parcels, and so lay a foundation for this iniquitous system of extortion. The Daily Chronicle had gone into this matter at length, and in the article which he had mentioned referred to the sale of book debts for very small sums, for instance, of £50 for £1, and concluded as follows:—We cannot believe that the House of Commons will approve of the Board of Trade 811 selling their right of suing for an assigned debt due to a bankrupt estate to the usurious sharks who make it their trade to grind the faces of the poor, and who buy that right at a price so low that it gives them almost illimitable powers of torment and persecution.He did not complain of individual Official Receivers in this matter—he complained of the system. His object in bringing the matter to the attention of the President of the Board of Trade was that the right hon. Gentleman might look into it carefully. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman to obtain a Return from the County Courts throughout the country—showing (1), the number of sales of book debts by the Official Receivers in Bankruptcy; (2), the amount of the debts sold; (3), the sums realised by the sales; and (4), the amounts by which dividends had been increased by such transactions. If such a Return was procured, it would satisfy the right hon. Gentleman of the substantial character of the grievance to which his attention was now being directed. The right hon. Gentleman would then, no doubt, see the necessity of taking strong action to prevent this sort of thing in the future. There was another point to which he wished to call attention—namely, the question of the official residences of the Official Receivers. The Official Receivers did not always have offices in the districts in which they acted, the consequence being that persons sometimes had to go a long way to wait on them for the purpose of giving information as to the state of their affairs. In one case a person living in the Tunbridge Wells district had to attend, not at Tunbridge Wells to give information, but at an office near London Bridge. This was an unfortunate man earning 15s. or 16s. a week, and it was hard upon him to have to go up to London instead of to Tunbridge Wells.
§ MR. HANBURYsaid, that as this was the first occasion on which the Votes had been increased by any payment on account of the Act of 1890 dealing with the winding-up of companies, he wished to direct the attention of the President of the Board of Trade to the Report of the Inspector General of Joint Stock Companies, which disclosed some startling facts. It was shown that in one year 120 companies were wound up by the order of the Court, 32 were voluntarily 812 wound up, and 722 were wound up without any superintendence at all. The winding up of these companies involved a loss of £24,000,000. Of these companies 111 had been in existence for three years, 50 for two years, and 24 for one year only. The Inspector General stated that in no single case was the failure of one of these Companies brought about by any ordinary misfortune such as might attend a private trader. In every case the disaster was due either to mismanagement, or the promotion of illusory objects. He thought the time had come when the Board of Trade should be able to exercise more supervision over these swindling companies. Of course, the loss of £24,000,000 in one year must be bad for trade, and he hoped the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Mundella) would be able to introduce next Session a Bill for increasing his powers on the subject. Under Clause 56 of the Companies Act the right hon. Gentleman could appoint Inspectors and examine into and report upon a company at the request of one-fifth of the shareholders. He was afraid that was too large a number to require to combine together in order to bring the power into operation.
§ MR. BARROW (Southwark, Bermondsey)said, that at the beginning of the year he asked the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Mundella) whether his attention had been called to the registration of debenture bonds created by fraudulent and insolvent Companies. The right hon. Gentleman replied that the Lord Chancellor (Lord Herschell) was giving his favourable attention to the question. Months elapsed, and he (Mr. Barrow) called the attention of the Attorney General (Sir C. Russell) to it. The Attorney General promised that the Lord Chancellor would consider the subject with a view to legislation. Had any action been taken?
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. MUNDELLA,) Sheffield, BrightsideWith respect to the first complaint made by the hon. Member for North St. Pancras (Mr. T. II. Bolton), my attention was called to the article in The Daily Chronicle in January last about the sale of debts. The question was investigated, and the result of the investigation was to satisfy me that there 813 was a class of men who exercised their calling in such a way as to inflict the greatest possible hardship upon poor people. As a result, I, in February last, caused a Circular to be issued to all the Official Receivers of the country calling their attention to the practice of selling debts, and requesting that it should not be carried out as it had been; that no debts should be sold by public auction unless where they were assigned as part of a going business; that in no case should any debts be transferred until all reasonable facilities had been afforded for the settlement of the claim; and that special notice should be given to the Department of all sales to second parties before they were actually effected. The result is that, so far as estates in bankruptcy are concerned, I believe the system has been brought into discredit. The cases quoted by the hon. Gentleman are all cases relating to last year. I have consulted with the Chief Inspector and the principal Official Receivers, and find that they have acted upon my Circular. I am informed that the whole system has been gradually brought into discredit, and the trade has been gradually cut out. Only the other day a professional debt collector summoned a poor person for a small amount, and the Judge made an order for the payment of 1d. a month, the first 1d. to be paid six years hence. It is so well understood by the County Court Judges that the system results in hardship that they are endeavouring as far as they possibly can to put an end to it.
§ MR. MUNDELLANO; I cannot give a Return, because it is impossible to go into old estates. I may point out that though officials in bankruptcy may do all they can to put a stop to this practice there is nothing to prevent private persons, especially medical men and others, selling their book debts at a low price. The County Court Judges are the persons who can most effectually check the practice, and they are doing so. With respect to the Official Receiver having an office at Tunbridge Wells, it was found that in that district it was more convenient to solicitors, clients, and everybody that the office should be near 814 London Bridge Station. It would cost a great deal more to send a solicitor to Tunbridge Wells than to bring a bankrupt, of which there are very few in that district, to London. That is the sole reason why the present system has been adopted with respect to the Report of the Chief Inspector; no doubt a very scandalous state of things has been disclosed. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hanbury) must, however, remember that the Act was only passed in 1889, and that it had only had one year's trial before the Report was presented. It was one of the most stringent Acts ever passed by this House, and it has been very strictly put into operation during the past year. Numbers of prosecutions have taken place, some of which have not had satisfactory results. Some of them have cost the Treasury thousands of pounds, and the Judges have been very reluctant indeed to enforce the full provisions of the Act. I am quite sure that there has been no neglect on the part of the Official Receivers. The only complaint I have heard is that the Official Receivers are only too anxious to prosecute, and I constantly hear statements that they are prosecuting people. The hon. Gentleman asks me whether I can recommend an alteration of the Penal Law with the object of putting down fraudulent trading. I believe that the Act is making fraudulent trading at present as difficult as possible. It has only been about 18 months in operation, and has hardly had a fair trial yet. A most able Departmental Committee looked into the whole administration of the Department a short time ago, and they have reported that all is being done that can be done. With regard to the question of Debenture Bonds raised by my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Barrow), I have brought the matter before the Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor has not seen his way to introduce a Bill to regulate the registration of all the Debenture Bonds that may be issued, as he assures me such a measure would be very contentious.
§ MR. BARROWThat is not my case.
§ MR. MUNDELLAI should be very happy if the hon. Gentleman will put his case on paper, and bring it before the Lord Chancellor himself.
§ SIR A. ROLLITsaid, he thought the hon. Member for Bermondsey (Mr. Barrow) had brought forward a very important subject, and one which was hardly likely to be so difficult to deal with as was indicated by the President of the Board of Trade. Indeed, the Bills of Sale Bill, which had come down from the Upper House, would have afforded an opportunity of dealing with the subject if that measure had not been abandoned, and he had himself handed in Amendments with that object. He trusted that at an early date the matter would be dealt with. He wished to express to the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Mundella) the very general feeling that there had been too great a growth of officialism and centralisation in reference to the administration of the Winding-up and Bankruptcy Acts. That feeling was general in commercial circles, and it was also largely expressed in legal circles. Whilst he accepted the principles of the Act of 1883, and even more those of his own Act of 1890, he thought it most desirable that the administration of those Acts should not take the direction of too much officialism and centralisation if this could possibly be avoided. He had heard of instances in which compositions of a large amount had been refused, with the result that a very small dividend had been ultimately obtained. He hoped the subject was one which would receive the attention of the Board of Trade, and that as much concession as possible would be made to public feeling with regard to it. While the Insolvency Laws had been well administered recently, there was one gap which might well be filled with reference to the administration of estates by deeds of arrangement. Such deeds were now public under the Registration Acts. At the present time one dissentient creditor could by insisting upon payment of 20s. in the £1, either secure a preference for himself or prevent an arrangement; and this was the difficulty which it was desired to deal with. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would seek an early opportunity of securing by legislation, at the instance either of the Department or of some private Member, with the help of the Department, the removal of this mischief.
§ Resolutions agreed to.