case hill and another against shish if a trader be arrest on several action  and give bail to they all his not pay the debt in six month after such arrest  and bail give shall not make he a bankrupt until after the six month for the  throw c which enact that if any person shall be arrest and shall not pay or  compound for the same in six month he shall be deem and adjudge a bankrupt  shall not relate to the time of the arrest SC skin Indebitatus assumpsit for  twenty pound on non assumpsit plead a special verdict be find before the Lord  chief justice at guildhall the jury find that Benjamin Hinton be a goldsmith  and a trader as such in the city of London for diverse year before the ten day  of January in the thirtyfourth year of Charles the second that therein he  contract diverse debt to the value of fifty thousand pound that he be indebt  by bind to one Capel in four hundred pound that a capias be sue thereon out of  the common plea test the twelve of February in the thirtyfifth year of Charles  the second returnable quindena Paschae that after the testae and before the  return he be arrest thereon and special bail file that the twentysixth day of  February he be again arrest that sir John more become bail for he and give a  general security for he in all action that those debt be not pay in six month  that the three of march Hinton pay to the b cro James c cro car shower KB er p  defendant twenty pound then they find the statute of James c prout and then  they find the assignment by the commissioner to the plaintiff et si c shower  KB the sole question in this verdict be whether Benjamin Hinton the banker be  a bankrupt at the time of the pay the twenty pound videlicet the three of  march in the thirtyfifth year of Charles the second for if he be so then he  have no capacity of pay this money to the defendant after a act of bankruptcy  commit by he for that by those statute he have no power to dispose of any part  of his estate but it be all come within the provision and care of the law and  as it be in custodian law for the benefit of all his creditor ratable and  equal accord to their several and respective debt and it be so receive it  continue part of this bankrupt estate and be well assign by the commissioner  to the plaintiff and of this there can be no question nor have there be any  since the case of smith v mill a so that the only point debatable be whether  here be sufficient matter find to make Hinton a bankrupt on the three of march  first here can be no doubt but that he be a person capable of be so it be find  that he be a goldsmith and trader as such for diverse year before the time  mention in the verdict that he seek his livelihood by buy and sell in that  trade that he be indebt to the amount of fifty thousand pound and the jury may  have find it twice that sum and true too I agree all this make he no bankrupt  but then the matter which make the question be this he be arrest at several  man suit for several sum above a hundred pound and he neither pay nor compound  the same in six month and the question be whether this with the other matter  find shall make he a bankrupt from the time of such his arrest for if he be a  bankrupt from that time then he be so on the three of march now that he shall  be so we have the express word of the statute which the jury have find James c  that if any take a protection or prefer a bill or petition to compel his  creditor to accept a composition or to give a further day of payment or be  arrest for a hundred pound then due shall not pay or compound the same in six  month b or shall lie in prison for debt two month or more or shall escape upon  common or hire bail be imprison for debt he shall be deem and adjudge a  bankrupt to all intent shower KB and purpose so that to do either of these  five thing make he a bankrupt then come the clause that work the relation and  thereby in the say case of arrest or lie in prison for such debt and debt or  get forth by common or hire bail the bankruptcy be to commence from the time  of such first arrest now by the former clause or paragraph of the statute  there be five act of bankruptcy make which be not so before videlicet first  take a protection second prefer a petition or bill for composition three be  arrest for debt and not pay it in six month fourthly lie in prison two month  for debt five escape upon common or hire bail and in the three last of these  case the law have by the other clause provide that they shall be bankrupt from  the first arrest videlicet in the say case of arrest or lie in prison or  escape upon common or hire bail from the time of his or her say first arrest  now my Lord that it must be so I shall endeavour to prove it by argue in short  these three thing first that we be within the express and direct letter of  this law and that the word of the statute be with we second that this be the  intent of the maker of this statute that it shall c three that it will break  and overthrow almost all the rule of the law for the interpretation of statute  to make that strain force and unnatural construction which they on the other  side will have and for which they can assign not one reason in the law now I  will first observe that prima fancy the construction be with the plaintiff and  this be the sense of the collector and abridger of the law as a   b this act  of bankruptcy be repeal by whether c shower KB er p shepherd c and all the  scribble tribe they lie it down as a common place learning that if a man  become a bankrupt by arrest or imprisonment he shall be so from the first  arrest by this statute of James c I urge this only to show that this be the  first shower KB and most obvious construction which the word afford but second  in the say case of arrest or lie in prison or escape on common or hire bail  the case of arrest must be refer to that of arrest and nonpayment in six month  the case of lie in prison to that of lie in prison two month or more for debt  the case of escape on common or hire bail to that which be before enact to  make a man a bankrupt by do so and this concise way of expression be sure as  significant as if the three particular have be repeat again at large or  express in these word videlicet if a man be arrest for a just debt of one  hundred pound and pay it not in six month he shall be a bankrupt from the  first arrest if a man lie in prison two month he shall be a bankrupt from the  first arrest if a man escape on common or hire bail he shall be a bankrupt  from the first arrest this will sure have make it plain and with submission it  be as plain in this short concise explanatory clause and in the say case of  arrest c this certain be the real meaning of the word and no other tolerable  sense can be put upon they without a very great strain and the most cursory as  well as the most consider reader will think so upon read that statute in the  say case of arrest there be one relation to the forgo clause in lie in prison  there be another relation in get out on common or hire bail there be a three  and as it be in our print statutebook there can real be no great doubt make of  it and though I must confess that on the ParliamentRolls there be no comma  point or colon yet I think we need not the help of those distinguish mark in  this case to show the sense of those word for it be not say case of arrest and  lie in prison as they on the other side will have it the first disjunctive or  plain distinguish the case of arrest from that of lie in prison as the next or  distinguish it from that of escape on common or hire bail shower KB and these  three particular be express in the most significant word use before because  the arrest in the first case be the act of bankruptcy in the second case the  lie in prison and in the three case the escape be the act of bankruptcy and  these three instance stand on different circumstance and make three distinct  case in the first a arrest without imprisonment make a bankrupt with six month  nonpayment in the second a imprisonment for two month make the bankruptcy in  the three the escape at any time after imprisonment on common or hire bail now  these three be all in short repeat in the rational clause where it be say case  of arrest lie in prison or escape c and I will fain know how these three  particular can be express in more pertinent and significant term in short than  this be but my Lord I think it will be needless to insist any long on this  matter for I suppose it will be agree to I that we be within the letter though  they say we be not within the meaning of the law by reason of some pretend  inconvenience which they say will ensue if the literal construction be allow  now therefore to show second that we be within the intent and meaning of this  law and here I will humble observe to your lordship that we be now in the case  of a bankrupt who in our law be presume a cheat accord to the presumption in  the civil law be decoctor ergo fraudato and this appear by the preamble of the  several statute against bankrupt which show the meaning as well as the final  cause of a statute and therefore be say by coke to be a good key for the right  understanding of a law that of the Henry c be that diverse and sundry person  crafty and subtle obtain into their hand great substance of other man not mind  to pay or restore unto their creditor but at their own will and pleasure do  consume such substance obtain by credit accord to their own pleasure against  all equity and good conscience shower KB the Elizabeth c recite the increase  of bankrupt into great and excessive number the James c recite fraud and  deceit to increase among those that live by buy and sell to the hindrance of  traffic and commerce and to the general hurt of the kingdom by such as become  bankrupt and the James c upon which this question depend mention the increase  of bankrupt and the invention of fraud and deceit for the avoid and delude of  the good law in that behalf then already make and the remedy by they shower KB  er p provide now I will upon these preamble offer to your lordship first that  bankrupt be always think and deem by our lawmaker to be crafty fraudulent and  deceitful person and therefore their act ought all to be take title evil  parten second that the mischief intend to be remedy by those law be the cheat  knavery and fraud of such bankrupt three that the remedy intend and provide by  these law be to make their estate liable to the payment of their debt equal to  all their creditor from the time of their become bankrupt and in order thereto  to take it out of the bankrupt power to convey away or dispose of any part of  their estate from their creditor by any Act after the bankruptcy or to prefer  any one creditor before another but that all his debt shall be equal pay and  it be observable that in each general Act the description of a bankrupt be  enlarge which show that the same be ground on experience and make pure of  necessity so that if the letter of the law be with they and we be within the  equitable though far reach of the meaning of any of these law your lordship  will help we by such construction as shall advance the remedy and suppress the  mischief and such as shall relieve the creditor of such bankrupt shower KB  beside it seem most plain that this be the intention of the maker of this law  that a man arrest for a hundred pound and not pay it in six month shall be  deem a bankrupt from the first arrest we have their word for it which sure be  design to show their meaning but beside that it seem worthy of your lordship  observation that of all these five instance of bankruptcy make by this law the  three last and no more need a explanation from what time a person under these  circumstance shall be deem a bankrupt the first two be single transient  instantaneous act as take a protection or prefer a petition these two need no  explanation for if they be bankrupt it must be from the act do but the last  three case I have name be complicate act thing of time continuance and  duration and therefore our lawmaker declare from what time they shall relate  and the party be deem bankrupt now it will be very odd to imagine that five  new instance of bankruptcy shall be make and three of they need a explanation  they shall yet explain but two of these three beside if it shall be otherwise  the inconvenience will be infinite and such a opportunity put into the  bankrupt hand of cheat all mankind that have ever trust he as it be certain  the intention of these law to prevent for suppose a person indebt in the sum  of twenty thousand pound and in truth not worth above ten thousand pound which  be all abroad some of his creditor happen to arrest he for their just debt and  he not able to pay know his own condition and contrive how to get in his  estate and to defraud his creditor acquaint a friend with his condition and  prevail with he to become his bail for the sum he be arrest for he then obtain  six month time to possess conceal secure and dispose of his estate and then he  be ready to discharge his bail by satisfaction or render himself to prison as  it shall suit best with his convenience and so cheat all the rest of his  creditor and shower KB though his creditor shall certain know his design yet  it will be impossible for they in the mean time to prevent his make away his  estate if they arrest he there be bail and he have six month time to play his  trick and there be no way to prevent it but by the literal and I think intend  provision of this law in make he a bankrupt from the first arrest and this be  not a foreign supposition but have be of late the common practice of most  trade person in a fail condition Thomson temple and hind as well as Hinton  have play the same game and cheat their creditor by this device and this be  the very fact of the case at bar and it be almost find so for here the jury  have find that Hinton be indebt in the sum of fifty thousand pound and among  other to the person name in the verdict and arrest at their suit for those  debt that sir John more become his bail and further that sir John more give a  general note under his hand order himself bail in all action the which of  itself look and carry the face of fraud and the generality of it seem a  demonstration of fraud for no man will be bail in all cause but for some  particular design and the jury have also find that Hinton be fifty thousand  pound in debt at this time a case that in all its circumstance as it be on  this verdict be never before so that my Lord on this verdict you can suppose  Hinton at this time able or visible able to have pay his shower KB er p debt  but this contrivance of his with his friendly bail have enable he to cheat all  the rest of his creditor except sir John more who be satisfy his debt but no  man else which be a great inconvenience and never to be avoid if the word of  this statute shall be strain to any other than their literal and real meaning  and this be a mischief intend to be remedy as any other that can be mention or  assign within this law I hope there be no reason for any other construction  especial since three the rule of law be with we too this be undoubted a  remedial law and therefore to be extend shower KB by equity and not restrain  as penal law which be so construe in favour of life or liberty b this law have  be construe several time by equity for the relief of creditor but never  against the letter and creditor both and if any construction can be make more  beneficial for the creditor one than another your lordship will admit that  construction as find on the best of rule that of suum whoever it be to assign  of give to every man his own and upon that foundation stand all these law  against bankrupt and so it be resolve in march beside no construction be to be  allow of a Act of parliament that will make any clause sentence or word void  when another construction will make it all significant together all the part  clause and word of a statute ought if possible to have some meaning now here  in this case the word arrest will be void if you judge it otherwise than I  hope for then the bare word lie in prison will do it this be a Act of  explanation and this very clause be explanatory and therefore admit not so  easy of a intendment or equitable construction but ought to be construe accord  to the word for there ought not to be a explanation upon a explanation to  prevent infinity of doubt and therefore I hope you will not restrain it c  beside my Lord when a law by express provision enact how construction shall be  make such clause so directive of construction be of the same force and have  the same authority as any other clause in such law it be most true your  lordship have a liberty of interpret a law accord to the particular exigence  of the case in question but when the same law direct how such interpretation  shall be make then I be sure your lordship will be so far influence by that  direction as not easy to make any other construction without some great  important and unanswerable reason to the contrary none of which can be show in  this case shower KB now here this statute direct a interpretation beneficial  in favour of creditor and strict upon the bankrupt and his act such as the  payment of money or conveyance of his estate or the like now my Lord either  this case be plain or it be doubtful if plain then I be sure by the word it be  with we if doubtful in construction then the law direct such construction in  favour of my client who be creditor beside suppose this construction agreeable  to the intent then sure I be it be a rule that no statute shall be restrain  against the letter and intent both be the consequence never so inconvenient  for that overthrow and absolute subvert the use and design of such law corbet  case and and it be the parliament that must remedy such inconvenience not this  court I may spend a great deal of your lordship time in cite abundance of case  where statute shall be restrain and where extend but I think it needless to  trouble your lordship with any since that in question be undoubted a remedial  law and the cheat of bankrupt be the mischief intend to be remedy and here be  one that I have name which can be help but by the aid of this statute and  therefore ought to be construe within the intent especial since there be no  great or any considerable reason give to the contrary for the only material  objection be the inconvenience in case this construction be allow which they  say be great but not so great as be pretend as that if a trade person be  arrest and bail and a three person who know nothing of it intrust he or deal  with he that if such a person shall be a bankrupt from the first arrest that  then every person so deal with he will be force to return the good and yet  lose the money he pay for they which they say will be so great a mischief that  it will discourage trade to this I say the same thing may happen in many case  every day where I buy good of a man that have no property b see Heydons case    c cro car style uppam v hide dyer butler v baker   shower KB er p but beside  most of shower KB these be provide for by James c be within the equity of that  proviso that no debtor of the bankrupt be endanger for the payment of his debt  true and good fide to any such bankrupt before such time that he shall know  that he be become a bankrupt I e all person pay money to or buy good of a  bankrupt be to be receive within the equity of that proviso if they know he  not to be such as to the objection for such land of a trader I answer that  mischief do not immediate concern trade for he who purchase land of a  goldsmith may be say to have notice or at least a suspicion of his intend  bankruptcy and he deal not with he in that matter as a trader but as a  landholder and buy the land at his peril subject to all such encumbrance as  land be liable to which be innumerable therefore caveat emptor now on the one  hand by a equitable construction of the law accord to that proviso in the case  mention all or most of the mischief suppose to arise by adjudge any person a  bankrupt from the time of his first arrest though he put in bail will be  accommodate on the other hand it be impossible to prevent a bankrupt from gain  time to get in his estate and to defraud his creditor without adjudge he a  bankrupt from the time of his first arrest but be the consequence worse than  be pretend here be a Act of parliament to which every man consent be suppose  to be give as well to come as present and so it can do no injury as be say in  hob and there be hundred of rule in the law which may bring as great hardship  upon some man as possible can be pretend in this case and yet be allow as the  statute of enrolment of deed which by relation avoid mean act do in the six  month c that which I contend for be no more I can muster up a great many case  where a man shall part with that which he have once lawful obtain as when he  purchase of the king accountant so where he shall pay again that which he  shower KB have already pay as when he pay rend to a feme covert though he know  her not to be such d but beside all these there be several other act of  bankruptcy which be agree and allow to be such and yet for some time after the  bankrupt may continue his trade and seem in great credit he may keep his shop  and walk the exchange notwithstanding as for instance he may conceal himself  to avoid the payment of a particular sum his servant may deny he at home and  pretend he go into the country and yet he may trade in his shop after this  some time before his condition be know he may make a fraudulent conveyance of  his estate to defraud his creditor this will make he a bankrupt and yet he may  possible trade with credit for some month until his estate be discover in the  case of Heylor v hall e it be resolve that if a trader in debt conceal himself  in his house for a day or a hour for to delay or to defraud his creditor this  make he a bankrupt within the statute and yet his other correspondent may no  more know of that than of this and in Bludworths case f glynne say that once a  bankrupt and ever a bankrupt in all these case the mischief to some be as  great and may be great than can be pretend in judge he a bankrupt from the  first arrest even when he put in bail especial in the manner as this verdict  have find it all the inconvenience and mischief which they can pretend may  ensue on this construction will ensue on they for after the six month he may  as well as before trade and traffic and none of his correspondent know it but  he that arrest he and he will no more trust he before than after for otherwise  he will not have arrest he but as to other it may be the same thing and  notwithstanding that inconvenience they agree he a bankrupt after the six  month the case of Duncomb v Walter g be object shower KB that this question be  never argue in Westminster hall but in that one case and that be on Staley the  goldsmith bankruptcy but as I remember I will not be positive the main point  there be concern a executor right to a action before probate and the reason of  that judgement be chief because the arrest of the party bankrupt be at the  suit of the executor before he have prove his testator will and that so find  on a special verdict and as to the other point my Lord north be as I be inform  of opinion clear with the plaintiff but however that be that be but one single  case and the inconvenience of d Dutton v Tracy cro James e palm f side g ante  case shower KB er p it be manifest since in the frequent cheat of bankrupt in  this particular beside every case stand on its own bottom and have its own  circumstance here it be find so that it can but be presume that the bail be ex  intention ad defraudand Hinton be indebt in which Staley be not of which most  man must be conusant here be a great many arrest there be but one these be  thing of a public notice whereas notice of a original may be private give and  therefore not the same reason for our lawmaker to make a relational bankruptcy  in the one as in the other here be a general universal and indefinite order  for be bail to all action which be not there here be no find that he be in  visible credit on the three of march and why shall it be so presume I know not  since in law as well as philosophy de non being et non that this only is  apparent eaden be ratio so that whatsoever hardship it may be on some it can  be none on the defendant Hinton be under these ill circumstance at this time  and these notorious one too thing that in their own nature need no particular  notice here be a banker in London indebt arrest by writ out of the king bench  arrest by writ out of the common plea arrest on plaint levy in the sheriff  court and all this upon bind for money lend and unpay and in the same place  where the defendant life shower KB there be as much reason to say the second  particular where it be say or escape shall be copulative as in our case and  then the bankruptcy from the arrest shall be but in one case and in the say  case of arrest and lie in prison and escape on common or hire bail and in no  other case whatsoever so that none shall be a bankrupt from the first arrest  but he who escape upon common or hire bail and when the statute say three case  it must be mean only one case there be as much reason for that as for the  other construction it be true here be no fraud nor purpose of be a bankrupt  find nor be there need of any such find for we say the Act of parliament make  he such ab beginning it be true argumentum ab inconsistency be strong but not  conclusive especial against the express letter of the law and when a mischief  may be nay actual be on the other side all statute make against fraud shall  have a favourable exposition in order to help the party as twine case h Mr  Thompson argue e contra from the inconvenience and the case of Staley wright  chief justice and the rest of the court deliver their opinion for the  defendant without have that due consideration of the case as it deserve as I  think therefore I it remains to to waver in opinion