Lords Sitting of 13 March 1879

MINUTES.
REPRESENTATIVE PEER FOR SCOTLAND—Earl of Dundonald, v. Earl of Lauderdale, deceased (Certificate).
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Bankers' Books (Evidence)* (24); Friendly Societies Act (1875) Amendment* (25); Habitual Drunkards* (26); Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Army)* (27).
Second Reading—Committee negatived—Considered—Third Reading—Exchequer Bonds (No. 1)*, and passed.
Committee—Bankruptcy Law Amendment (8).
Committee—Report—Debtors Act, 1869, Amendment* (9); Supreme Court of Judicature Acts Amendment (11).
Third Reading—Consolidated Fund (No. 1)*, and passed.

REPRESENTATIVE PEER FOR SCOTLAND.
The Clerk of the Crown in Chancery delivered his certificate that the Earl of Dundonald had been elected a Representative Peer for Scotland in the room of the Earl of Lauderdale deceased.
SOUTH AFRICA—THE ZULU WAR— THE REINFORCEMENTS.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  EARL CADOGAN: My Lords, it may be convenient I should state to your Lordships that a telegram has been received at the Colonial Office to-day from the Officer administering the Government of the Mauritius. It is dated March 3, and in these terms—
  "Tamar, from Ceylon, with reinforcements for Natal, arrived this morning. She leaves at
  790
  daylight to-morrow with two officers 60 men Royal Artillery and mountain guns from this garrison, in addition to troops brought from Ceylon."

EXCHEQUER BONDS (No. 1) BILL.
(The Earl of Beaconsfield.)
On the Motion of the Earl of BEACONSFIELD,
Bill read 2a (according to Order); Committee negatived: Then Standing Orders Nos. XXXVII. and XXXVIII. considered (according to Order), and dispensed with; Bill read 3a, and passed.

BANKRUPTCY LAW AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 8.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
BANKRUPTCY LAW AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 8.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  Clauses 1 to 3, agreed to, with verbal Amendments.
  Clause 4 (Interpretation of certain terms in the Act).
  THE EARL OF POWIS: I have given Notice to omit the words in the Interpretation Clause relating to resolutions passed without proxies as the simplest mode of raising the question whether proxies should or should not be abolished. I have had a communication with the Associated Chambers of Commerce sitting last week at London, and have received some pamphlets expressing their opinions against abolition, but equally in favour of regulation. I have also received communications from Manchester that the largest houses connected with the home trade there are in favour of their retention. Your Lordships will observe that the creditors in a bankruptcy are essentially a non-resident constituency. In one case, cited by the Chambers of Commerce, the bankruptcy in South Wales, where there were 78 creditors, was removed to Manchester at a meeting where two creditors holding proxies attended. In another, where the debts were £81,000 and the assets £42,000, and where consequently the estate was worth looking after, 46 were London creditors, and 48 country, including one in Switzerland and one in Australia. Then, again, as almost every County Court is a bankruptcy court, a large house may have to look after half-a-

  791
  dozen cases in as many counties at once. But this question not only affects commercial but agricultural interests. The farmer sells his corn to a corn dealer, the Suffolk farmer sells his malting barley to a large brewer at Burton. The Midland counties' farmer sells all his beasts to a salesman at Smithfield. The small Welsh farmer or local butcher sends the hind quarters of his Welsh mutton in the season to London, reserving the fore quarters for the local markets. If these are to leave their farms to look after their claims in a case of bankruptcy, it is obvious that they will be utterly disfranchised. The argument from abuse points to regulation, not to abolition. In your Lordships' House no Peer was allowed to hold more than two, and proxies were required to be entered a certain time before the debate. The picture of a Minister coming down to the House with a pocket full of proxies was nothing but a journalistic fiction. I have heard many vague statements as to abuse, but no instance except that of persons canvassing for votes for the appointment of trustees with a view to personal profit. Now, this abuse is much more effectually met by the clause which provides that a general meeting shall appoint a Committee of Inspection of five, who shall appoint the trustees. Again, when the interests are large, if proxies be abolished, it will be easy for those interested to pay the smaller creditors to go down and attend and vote as they are directed. The Bill does not state how far this exclusion of proxies is to be carried. It only mentions one question at one meeting in Section 21 where they are excluded. But it gives the Court an indefinite power under rules and orders of preventing their exclusion. This exclusion is a question not of detail for the Court, but of principle to be settled by the Bill. I trust your Lordships will decline to allow this disfranchisement at the discretion of the Court, and I beg to move the omission of the words of of which I have given Notice.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that his noble Friend mistook those provisions of the Bill which referred to proxies. The Bill did not abolish proxies, but regulated their use so as to prevent the abuse of them which was now complained of. The object was to prevent the discharge of a bankrupt without the
  792
  mind of the creditors being expressly directed to that purpose; and this it was thought would be effected by the signature of a special resolution signed by a majority of creditors present at a meeting representing three-fourths in number and value. It would be in the discretion of the Court to allow or disallow voting by proxy for a special resolution.
  LORD SELBORNE, agreeing in the object, thought the clause required amendment.
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 5 (Extension of companies and large partnerships) agreed to.
  Clause 6 (Petition and Acts of Bankruptcy).
  LORD SELBORNEsaid, he objected to this clause, on the ground he had stated on the second reading, that it afforded great facilities to a man to have himself made a bankrupt. Since 1869 that had not been allowed; and it was not good policy to allow a person to put an end in that way to his full liability towards his creditors. The sounder principle was to allow his creditors to avail themselves of their power to make him a bankrupt.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the proposal had been for a considerable time before the public, and that he had not heard from any quarter an objection to it, while he was aware that in many quarters it was highly recommended. It was quite true that under the existing law a person could not be declared bankrupt on his own petition; but, practically, he could do so by availing himself of the liquidation clauses of the Act of 1869, and so enjoy the sweets—if there were such—without tasting the bitters of bankruptcy. Why should not a man who could not pay his debts be able to tell that to his creditors in Court as well as at a meeting? It must be distinctly understood that under this Bill a petitioner could not obtain his discharge without the consent of a large majority of his creditors or the order of the Court. It would be much better to allow a man who could no longer go on with a fair prospect of paying his debts to make himself a bankrupt by direct means than force him to

  793
  go from bad to worse in business, or to avail himself of such side means as those which were open to him under the existing law.
  LORD SELBORNEsaid, that it appeared to him that under the operation of this clause a bankrupt would be absolutely entitled to his discharge—that, in fact, that would be his right from the Court.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 7 to 16, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 17 (Regulations as to first general meeting).
  THE EARL OF POWISsaid, it seemed to him that under the power given to the Court by this and Clause 18 to make rules, proxies might be abolished altogether.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he would move an Amendment in the clause, which he thought would have the effect of preventing such a result.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 18 to 20, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 21 (Second general meeting).
  (The clause provides that the Court may summon a second general meeting of the creditors, at which a report shall be made upon the affairs of the debtor; that the meeting may thereon determine that an adjudication in bankruptcy shall be made against the debtor, or the proceedings in bankruptcy be stayed and the estate wound up under a deed of arrangement; the creditors might also at this second meeting, by a special resolution made without proxies, determine that the affairs of the debtor had been sufficiently investigated, and that he might be discharged by the Court. If no such resolution should be passed, and it should appear to the Court that there was no reasonable probability of the confirmation of a deed of arrangement, the Court was to make an absolute order for bankruptcy against the debtor).
  LORD SELBORNEsaid, that this clause of the Bill required the most mature deliberation.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORwas understood to say that this clause should
  794
  be further considered before the next stage of the Bill.
  Clause agreed to.
  Remaining clauses agreed to.
  The Report of the Amendments to be received on Thursday next.

DEBTORS ACT (1869) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 9.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
House in Committee (according to Order).
Bill reported, without Amendment; and to be read 3a To-morrow.

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 11.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 11.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  LORD SELBORNEsaid, it would be well to insert a provision to enable the Lord Chancellor to appoint one Judge to take the place of another in the case of sickness or the like emergency. He thought such a provision very desirable, for, otherwise, very important business might be delayed by some sudden sickness or accident befalling one of the Judges. What had happened recently to a Judge of the Chancery Division showed the necessity of something being done.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that between the present time and the next stage of the Bill he would consider the suggestion of his noble and learned Friend.
  Bill reported, without Amendment; and to be read 3a on Thursday next.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (No. 1) BILL.
(The Earl of Beaconsfield.)
CONSOLIDATED FUND (No. 1) BILL.

  THIRD READING.
  Bill read 3a (according to Order), and passed.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.