§ Lord Denmanmoved the Second Reading of this Bill, which had been framed in consequence of a case of hardship brought under the notice of the House in a petition which he had presented. The petitioner stated that he was a bankrupt; and, having conscientious scruples against taking an oath, had refused to swear an affidavit relative to the disclosure of his property; in consequence of which he had been committed to prison, and had remained there for three years and a half, although he was perfectly ready to make a full disclosure of his property, by way of declaration. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack was of opinion that such a case was worthy of the consideration of the House, and he (Lord Denman) had brought in this Bill to meet it; for, as the law now stood, any person who, from conscientious scruples, declined to make an affidavit of the sort mentioned, however willing he might be to make a declaration, might be imprisoned for life. The provisions of the Bill were to this effect—that if a party should be willing to make a declaration as to his property, having scruples to take an oath, and if the Commissioner should be convinced—for a discretion was left to him—that the party was ready to state the truth, and did not pretend scruples of conscience, then the Commissioner should be at liberty to receive his statement without being sworn to. He should propose that the same penalties should attach to a false declaration as to perjury.
§ The Earl of Devonsaid, that it was his impression that it would be much better to require that the declarations of men who were to give an account of their property before a Commissioner should in no case be made on oath, than to leave it to the discretion of the Commissioner to determine whether they had conscientious scruples or not against taking an oath.
§ Lord Denmanconcurred; but in compliance with a suggestion from the Duke of Wellington, withdrew the Motion for the second reading, and would allow the Bill to lie over for the present, with the view of considering whether a more general measure, of the nature mentioned 1436 by the Earl of Devon, might not be introduced.