1788.
If the plea had been drawn up at large, inftead of being entered on the docquet, it muft have been purfuant to the act of Affembly,
“ that the caufe of action did accrue before fuch time as he became
“ a bankrupt;” and the certificate is made by the act only a matter of evidence.
The queftion, now to be decided, is, whether, upon a trial at law, the creditor of a bankrupt may give evidence to controvert the trading, bankruptcy, and conformity? Or, whether the certificate is conclufive proof of all the proceedings before the Commiffioners: And in this cafe it is fortunate that the act of Affembly nearly purfues the words of the ftatute of 5 Geo. 2.c. 30. for, the analogy of the law muft greatly ftrengthen the application of the authorities, and facilitate the decifion of the Court.
The claufe, on which the argument arifes, is thus expreffed, both in the Engliʃh ftatute, and the act of Pennʃylvania: “ And, in
“ cafe fuch bankrupt fhall afterwards be impleaded for any debt
“ due before he became a bankrupt, fuch bankrupt fhall be dif-
“ charged upon common bail, and may plead in general, that the
“ caufe of action did accrue before fuch time as he became a bank-
“ rupt ; and the certificate of fuch bankrupt's conforming and the
“ allowance thereof, fhall be fufficient evidence of the trading,
“ bankruptcy, commiffion, and other proceedings precedent to the
“ obtaining fuch certificate, unleʃs the Plaintiƒƒ can prove the faid
“ certificate was obtained unƒairly, or make appear any concealment
“ by fuch bankrupt to the value of Fifteen Pounds.”
Certain it is, than from the 13 Eliz. c. 7. (at which time Commiffioners of bankrupts were appointed in England) until the paffing of the 5 Geo. 2. a period of about 200 years, there is no inftance that ever the proceedings of the Commiffioners, when called for, were not revife and corrected in the Courts of Law. By the ftatue 5 Geo. 1.c. 24. the bankrupt's certificate might be given in evidence, and was directed to be a full difcharge of any action that fhould be brought by any creditor of fuch bankrupt; yet, it appears by the cafe in 1 Stra. 533. that it was ftill neceffary to prove the act of bankruptcy, befides producing the certificate; becaufe the words, ʃuch bankrupt, related to fuch perfon as was defcribed in the ftatute. Under that ftatute, therefore, the certificate was fo far from being conclufive evidence, that it was not fufficient, without other proof, to fhew that he was an object of the act, by being a trader, and having committed an act of bankruptcy.
What then was the alteration introduced by the 5 Geo. 2.c. 30? It had been found very inconvenient to compel a bankrupt, as often as he was fued, to enter into a proof of all the circumftances which had already been proved before the Commiffioners: This ftatute, therefore, enacted, that “ the certificate fhould be ʃuƒƒicient evidence of the trading, bankruptcy, commiffion,&c.” and here, ex vi termini, we muft inter that this was not the cafe before, as the word ʃuƒƒicient naturally refpects what had been hitherto inʃuƒƒicient. The ftatute, however, does not declare, that the certificate fhall be
