SECOND READING. (Hansard, 23 August 1889)

§ LORD HERSCHELL
My Lords, this is a measure which has passed the other House, its object being to codify the Law of Partnership. The Bill was introduced at the instance of the Associated Chambers of Commerce. It was carefully drawn, and considered and revised by a Select Committee of the other House, but it did not reach your Lordships' House until the month of August. I was asked to move its Second Reading, with a view to its being carried, if possible, this Session; but I said that, as far as I was concerned, I could not urge the House to attempt to pass the measure during the present Session, because it appeared to me to be impossible at this late period to give to it that attention without which I do not think it would he right to pass a Bill of this character. I have always been an advocate for dealing in the manner in which this Bill deals with the Law of Partnership with different branches of our law; but, at the same time, I believe that if any such codification is to be at all successful it can only be so if the utmost care and deliberation are used, so as to make the result of the labours of Parliament as perfect as possible, and any hasty or immature legislation would be only likely to retard the cause of codification as well as to do actual mischief. I am quite aware that great attention has been given to this subject in the other House. At the same time, we who have had to do with matters of this description know that, however much care is exercised, the more a measure of this description is criticised and revised the more likely it is to be found in the result to meet the desires of those who advocate the legislation. I trust that this measure in the coming Session may receive the attention and 235 consideration of your Lordships in the way it deserves; but I am quite sure that it ought to be most carefully considered by those who have experience both in commercial matters and in the law relating to this subject. My object in making these observations, and in moving the Second Beading of the Bill, is to explain why it has been found impossible to pass it into law, or attempt to pass it through your Lordships' House in the present Session, and also to invite the criticism of the public, and more especially of the legal profession upon the Bill in the shape in which it has emerged from the Select Committee of the other House. I am quite sure that such criticism is likely to be valuable when your Lordships come to consider the Bill on a future occasion. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
I am afraid I cannot speak with the same degree of fervour about the codification of the various branches of the law as my noble and learned Friend does; but whenever such measures are likely to be successful, I think it can only be when they are brought in under the responsibility of the Government for the time being. I think this is the first and a very ambitious attempt made by those not charged with the responsibility of the Government to codify the law. I do not propose to express any opinion whatever as to the skill with which this measure has been prepared, simply because I have had no opportunity of considering it. My noble and learned Friend quite recognised the fact, and told your Lordships that with a Bill of this sort it would be impossible to carry it through without the most careful consideration. I need not remind your Lordships that the Law of Partnership is delicate and intricate and difficult, and the attempt to codify it, if it is to be successful, must be the result of very long and laborious consideration. Therefore, whether such a Bill as this ought to be permitted to be in private hands, or not to be either accepted by, or promoted by, the Government itself, is a question which may require consideration hereafter. All I would at present say is 236 that in consenting, as I shall, to the Second Reading of this Bill, it is only upon the ground that some Bill of the sort may be considered desirable to promote. I remember hearing a great Parliamentary authority in the other House (Mr. Gladstone) saying that the only thing that the House committed itself to by reading a Bill a second time was that there should be some Bill of the sort, and in no way adopting any of the provisions of the Bill in question. In that spirit, and in that spirit alone, I think it is that your Lordships may safely read this Bill a second time when you learn that it is to proceed no further this Session; but whether it does or does not sufficiently codify the law in the sense in which it is desirable that it should be codified, I hope your Lordships will keep your judgment quite free when the question comes for consideration hereafter, because, as I have said, it is far too difficult and intricate a question of law for your Lordships to commit yourselves to one way or the other without very careful consideration. In the meantime, with the harmless declaration, if that is all it amounts to, that some codification of the Law of Partnership is a desirable thing—if that is all your Lordships commit yourselves to by reading this Bill a second time, I do not propose to oppose the Motion made by the noble and learned Lord.

§ LORD HERSCHELL
I would like to say just one word by way of reply to what has fallen from the noble and learned Lord. He is under an error in supposing that this is the first attempt made by those not in Office to carry out any codification of of the law. The only successful piece of codification of the English Law that I know of was a Bill introduced by a private Member in the other House for the codification of the law relating to bills of exchange and negotiable instruments. That has been a great success, I say, without hesitation, and it has been treated as a model, indeed almost adopted in its terms, by other Legislatures. I am not myself prepared to subscribe to the doctrine that codification ought only to be undertaken by the Government of the day, although I freely recognise that they have facilities which no private Member can have, and if they are willing to undertake the 237 work no one would be more heartily glad than myself.