[insolvency]

Clancey v. Singdon and others

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Stephen J., 2 July 1841

Source: Sydney Herald, 3 July 1841

INSOLVENT DEBTORS’ COURT.

FRIDAY. – Before Mr. JUSTICE STEPHEN.

CLANCEY V. SINGDON, LEEWORTHY V. SAME,

CARRIC V. SAME.

The insolvent in this case was a clerk with a salary of £185 per annum; but having had occasion to borrow the sum of £[4]5 about six months ago; he had since then been paying interest for the same at the rate of £2 8s. 4d. per month! His Honor said he considered the exaction of such enormous interest as being a most scandalous, low-bred, blackguard transaction, and enquired who was the individual guilty of such a most usurious practice, as he never in his whole life heard of such enormous extortion, and said he would recommend the insolvent to pay no more, in order that if the person who made such a charge [f]elt aggrieved he might bring the affair before the Court, for the purpose of having the opinion of the Court as to whether such enormous transactions were to be countenanced, which had an evident tendency to consume the estates and property of those who paid it, and disable them from paying their just and lawful debts. The insolvent said, he had obtained the accommodation through a friend; but he did not know what was the name of the person who had received the in[t]erest: he had been in his present situation several years, and had got into difficulties when he had but a comparatively small salary: about two years ago he owed between £120 and £130, but since then he had reduced it to between £55 and £60; he had been married about ten months, and since then he had been gradually diminishing his debts, he was willing to pay all his creditors without preference at the rate of £6 per month, but he considered it unfair to those creditors who had been easy on him to pay those who had pushed him to the utmost, he had also obtained the consent of the majority of his other creditors to such an arrangement. His Honor said, that such consequences resulted from the defective state of the insolvent laws, by which one creditor was enabled to pounce upon the whole of a debtor’s estate and pay himself in full, leaving nothing to pay any of the others, whereas by a better order of things, on a majority of the creditors agreeing the estate might be made available for their mutual benefit.  The opposing creditors having agreed to receive payment at the rate of £1 per month each. The insolvent was then discharged and the Court adjourned.