SECOND READING. (Hansard, 18 July 1882)

§ LORD BRAMWELL
, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that the Bill had passed the House of Commons, where it had been carefully considered by a Committee, consisting of eminent merchants, bankers, and lawyers, presided over by the Solicitor General, and its object was to codify the laws of England and Scotland on the subject of bills of exchange. At first the Bill applied to England only; but, on the application of persons representing Scotch interests, it was extended to Scotland, and a number of Scotch Members were put upon the Committee. The Bill, to a certain extent, endeavoured to assimilate the law of England and Scotland on the subject of bills of exchange, and the object of those who framed it was not to alter, but to codify the existing laws. He did not for a moment pretend that the measure was complete and perfect; in- 834 deed, he should have Amendments to propose to it when they got into Committee; and if it passed and became a Code he did not suppose it was one which would supersede the lawyers and their law hooks. It would still be necessary to have recourse to the lawyers and the law books to interpret or apply the Bill to cases as they arose from time to time. The object of those who framed the Bill, as he said, was to make a Code of the existing law, and to alter it as little as possible; but it was impossible, in framing that Code, that there should not be some alterations in the laws which they were endeavouring to embody into that Code, because principles, each of which was right in itself, being carried to extremes, resulted sometimes in what appeared to be positively repugnant. He would give them an illustration of the alterations in the Bill. By the law of England, Christmas Day and Good Friday were Common Law holidays, and bills of exchange, which otherwise would fall due on either of those days, by the Common Law of the land were payable on the day before. There were also certain statutory holidays, and bills of exchange which became due on those were payable the day after. Well, in Scotland, Christmas Day and Good Friday were not Common Law holidays, but statutory. The question had, therefore, arisen, what was to be done? It was impossible to leave the law so that a bill of exchange would fall due on one day in Scotland and on another day in England; therefore, an arrangement was come to between those who had charge of the Bill, and those who represented Scotch interests, that the same law should be applicable to both sides of the Tweed; and that, in regard both to Christmas Day and Good Friday, bills of exchange which became due on either of those days should be payable in England and Scotland on the day before. He mentioned this to show the necessity there sometimes was, when they were codifying laws, to make some slight alterations in them. He would only add, in conclusion, that he had not taken the Bill from those who had prepared it on trust, but had thought it his duty to go through it himself; and having done this, he could recommend it to their Lordships as worthy of being read a second time.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
said, that the fact that the Bill had been examined by the noble and learned Lord would go a long way towards assuring their Lordships of its worth. At the same time, the subject was one of the utmost possible importance. The Bill codified, as his noble and learned Friend had said, the whole of the Common and Statute Law on the subject, and it affected a very large part of the most important transactions of the mercantile world. It was desirable, therefore, that those of their Lordships who were conversant with the subject should carefully consider the details of the Bill, and for that reason he (the Lord Chancellor) hoped the next stage would be put off till a reasonable day. To his mind, it was doubtful whether a Bill of this magnitude and importance on such a subject should be passed through Parliament in a single Session without being maturely considered by all classes whose transactions were affected. He had no doubt that the Bill was very carefully considered by the Select Committee of the House of Commons; but he did not know whether in the House itself it had been publicly discussed. He observed that the noble and learned Earl (Earl Cairns) was not in his place, and urged that it would not be convenient to proceed in his absence.

§ LORD BRAMWELL
said, he proposed to fix the Committee stage for that day week.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
said, it was doubtful whether the noble and learned Earl (Earl Cairns) would be in his place by that day week.

§ THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)
said, he would suggest that the day should not be fixed until later on in the week.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON
asked the noble and learned Lord (Lord Bramwell) to fix the Committee for that day week; and then, if the noble and learned Earl (Earl Cairns) was not in his place, it could be further postponed.

§ LORD BRAMWELL
said, he would adopt that course.