STATE PAPERS. 



373 



4th. That it is a debt originally 

 due to him, and without trust : 



5th. That it has not been sued 

 for elsewhere : 



6th. That by not recovering it, 

 the crown debtor would be less 

 able to pay the crown. On each 

 of these points a few observations 

 may be expedient : — 



1st. The statement of the debt 

 to the crown. — As the real object 

 throughout is solely the advan- 

 tage of the individual, so he can 

 in most cases make this debt ap- 

 pear larger or smaller, as may 

 best suit his purpose, especially if 

 it be a bond debt ; by stating 

 either the whole sum for which 

 he is bound, or that portion only 

 which is due or demandable at the 

 time.* 



9dly. The debt due to the crown 

 debtor. — This being taken on his 

 own evidence, vvithout any means 

 of contravening it, instances are 

 not wanting of persons resorting 

 to an extent in aid as the shortest 

 mode to obtain payment of a dis- 

 puted account : for which, in- 

 deed, it affords facilities which no 

 other |>rocess will give. 



3dly. " That the debt is in 

 danger, imless means more s|)ee(ly 

 than the common couise of law 

 can be resorted to." 



• Formerly this made little or no dif- 

 ference, because on proof of any debt due 

 to the crown, however small, a man might 

 (irocure an extent in aid anainst his d(-btor 

 for any debt, however large ; but this gross 

 absurdity, as well as injustice, hiving been 

 remedied by the act just passed, it may now 

 become, in some cases, of consequence to 

 prove the debt to the crown as larjjely as 

 possible ; and it will be seen in the Appen- 

 dix, that a sub-distributer of stamps has 

 called himself a bond-debtor to the crown 

 in 1,V0()1. when his sale or distribution 

 varied from only about 4001. to less than 

 8001. per annum. -T^'Kvid. p.ai. 



This pari of th«? affidavit, though 

 implying the injury done to the 

 other creditors, and therefore jus- 

 tifiable only on the strong pre- 

 sumption, at least, that the public 

 interest would suffer from the loss, 

 is deemed indispensable in all 

 cases ; and, therefore, when the 

 private creditor is anxious to secure 

 liimself at all events, it is not 

 wonderful that the assertion should 

 sometimes be hazai'ded on slight 

 grounds ; accordingly it has been 

 stated, on the loosest evidence — 

 mere assertion of hearsay : and 

 the " ficit, " with all its destructive 

 consequences, has been granted 

 on no better foundation. Jt has 

 happened, that after all the mis- 

 chief has been accomplished, and 

 the man ruined, the extent itself 

 has been set aside for want of suf- 

 ficient proof on this necessary 

 point. 



4thly. That the debt is origi- 

 nally due to the party without 

 trust. — Your committee must 

 doubt if this can be truly sworn, 

 when, at the request of a man 

 holding a bill of exchange, a bond 

 debtor to the crown consents to 

 take it of him, knowing at the 

 time that the party to pay it is in- 

 solvent ; and when the matter 

 comes before the court, rather 

 chooses to abandon it than proceed 

 to trial. The transfer of debts for 

 this piupose, by taking bills of 

 exchange, has been frequent not- 

 withstanding this deposition. 



5thly, That the debt has not 

 been put in suit in any other 

 court; — a jtroceeding rarely oe- 

 cessary. 



(Jthly . That important clause called 

 the (/«o minus, which lies at the foot 

 of the whole, whereby the j)arty 

 swears, that if he cannot recover 



this 



