The Northern Daily Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-02-25 00:00:00

. _ • bank signatures, and the reg ular bankers demand- CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.—SPECI AL g Isg 10 at the close. The Cotton market. was MEETING. firm, and prices had improved from an eighth to quarter cent. per po un d. Fl our was stronger, and prices were 121 cen t s . per b arrel higher Wheat was without change. COMMERCIAL INTELLIGENCE. , COTTON : Du r i ng W e d nesday, . Thursday, and Friday of last week, a good demand continued to Prevail in this market for cotton, and th e f u ll rates, as quoted in ray last circular, Were paid, holder? exacting extreme prices. On Saturday, after receipt of the Persia's accounts, the business was some- W th hat che c k e d b y the advance demanded by holders and e extreme paucity of our stock. Yesterday a fair demand existed, and the sales show an advance on thMY quotations of last week of to -lc per lb. The sales since e s th inst. I es ti mated at 10,000 bales the bulk of which been taken on speculation, with some little for export to Great Britain and the Continent of Europe. Spinners have /lot taken much owing to the impossibility of transport p, in th e present cold weather. The clearances have been, to Liver 00l 2,121 b a l es ; B remen, 459 ; H amburg, 365 T otal, 2 ,945 bales. B°l ' l4l /RN MA RKETS : F or t h e wee k under review sho w an advance with large sales. Particulars are Where in full. The advices received by telegraph subsequently thew a further advance in price with reduced stocks, light receipt?, and a tendency towards higher prices. elloP There is no new feature to note in this regard. The bale general opi n i on favours the reduced estimates of 3,300,000 following is a statement of the movement in Cotton since the let September last, as compared with the preview three years :-. given else- 1856. 1855 1854. 1853. Zz eceipta at the Porta.. , 35 •1,987,000 1,, , ,000 1,458,000' 2,0, 2,000 ports t o Great Britain 763,000 647,000 441,000 816,000 France.,,,, 260,000 145,000 161,000 146,000 Total Exports ° other For . P 000 109,000 94 , t;00 138,000 Stock on h a d . .... rtS. 188' 1,211,000 901,000 696.000 1 130,000 * n " ........ ***** .. ** . 598,000 398,000 605,000 670,000 , ;iogg.rpt t opa?:e:re France., n t g : o o2 105,000 ,00 12 34 0 ; r 0: 1 2 23 0 0 0 0 29,000 8,000 21,000 7,000 Total _ r othe r For. Ports. 91,000 12000 moo' 5,000 10,000 portsss 0001 63,000 43,000 , an .4134483 r: Receipts—lncrease at the ports over last year —,1,7,000 bales ; decrease compared with 1853, 85,000. • ‘,.44473°2l3—lncrease to Great Britain, 116,000 bales ; decrease ol same dates in 18.53, 83,000. Increase to France, °OO O bal es ; same time 1853, 114,000. Increase to other 1 1i,., e gn Ports, 78 ,000 bales; same time in ]853, 50,000 bales. are firmer. To Li ver p oo l engagemen t s h ave be en at 7-32 d to id per lb ; to Havre, ac, ‘ a. lgre ßaNGEs on London am firmer, and bankers have c aneed th e i r rates to 91 to 9i per cent. On Paris there is ° t inge; th e rate is 5 21i. WILLIAM P. WRIGHT. Fr BREADSTUF FB. -"la: Business continued dull, at the extreme decline noted in the P.S. to our circular of the sth inst., till the rv ival o f the steamer Persia, on Saturday morning, with erpoel advices to the 26th January ; since then there has 12 7 a better feeling in the market, and prices have recovered Iv: c ents per b r l ., f rom the lowest point of last wee k. I, r l q uo te : — Western C ana l, 7 d o l e 50 c t o 7 d o l e 75 c per 1111 ' Ohio and pure G enesee , 8 d o l e t o 8 d o l e 26 c . F anc i es 4 0 i 8 extras 5 0 to, 8 dole 60c to 10 dols 50c. Southern kinds, 8 10 dole 50c. Canada, 8 dole to 9 dole 50c. t WIIR AT Remains with ou t c h ange. G enesee Whi te, 205 c '14.b210e per 60Ib s . S outhern White 205 c to 210 c. Western 1 White 205 e t o 21 0 c. Western Red 'and Mixed, 175 c .to Sle• Canada, 205 c to 210 e. Southern Red, 190 c to 195 c. quit t i ei r CORN is 5 cents per bushel lower for mixed 85c... :r e m rse i y xed an , d Northern Round Yellow, 80c to 83c per ." to `"°a• Southern Yellow, 80c to 85c. Southern White, 82c to 84c. &LEX : 115 to 126 c per 481bs. B YE: 125 c to 128 c per 561bs. R O 41 1 MEAL : 4 d o l e 00 c to 4 dole 25c per brl. YD FLOU R : 5 dole 00c to 6 dole 75c per brl. WOTHERBPOON, KINGSFORD & CO. 7 w •. Poi ere dull an d 25 cents lower. Pearl brought co as 75c to 8 d o ii, th e f ormer pr i ce. The m ar k e t is a littl e s t ea di er th an f or some ce & past, and prime qualities Liverpoool are rather higher. ;P6 " P ak The stock of new sheathing is small, and the iet is- very firm at 33 cents. Yellow metal is steady at " 6 ,. , Mot. Refined ingot is becoming scarce. h„) 4 " Small sales of Scotch pig continue to be made, from a t 33 past,le to 34 dols, 6 mos. Of American pig, within h r obt some 8000 to 10,000 tons have changed hands, for 0g delivery, on terms we did not learn. Bars are without In3e • 30 0 bdls double and English sheet b roug ht 4 cs , I month s. A r) Pig remains quiet but firm ; sales 54 t ons Sp an i s h, 1:e bond at $5 75 short time; and 30 do. hest English, e a ndhe interest. : T market for both foreign and New Orleans ts4Ssits quite dull. NA,v b AL STortus, with t h e except i on note d b e l ow, h ave b een "erY dull indeed for all descriptions, and prices of spirits tur !pentine tend to decline. Rosin has been entirely neglected, ad we be ar o f no further transactions in tar, though there 'could'4ld no doubt, be an average business generally, if goods be delivered. OILS : Crude whale remains inactive, and we have no sales to c lor i t ; 500 bbls bleached winter were bought No w come here on private terms- At , t 0 Sperm is he ld xna u llY at 180 dole, at which a sale of 1000 brie has been le at New Bedford ; 1500 gallons winter sold for export l e rrns we di d not learn. Linseed remains dull, and is oter with sales. ti_:rßeo vistosts : With li ght receipts and a decreased inclina the part of holders to realise, the market for mesa 1 2 8 advanced 25c to 371 c, with a better demand, part fore'ilielettlativ sales 4,100 brie, closing at 16 dole to 16 dole Xit4 , and 14 dole for prime, including 2000 The aler t in all this month, at 16 dols 25c. The t for beef continues dull, and prices favour the pur to49eVithout any positive decline; sales 500 brie at 9 dols is 5c for country prime, 10 dole to 11 dols for do mess, 60 :718 to 13 dole 75c for Vermont mess, 11 dols to 14 dole ° .4 repacked Western, and 15 dole to 16 dole for extra Beef p rime mess beef continues dull, and prices are nominal. ° "anis are moderately active, and the market is steady ; sales i b 'en L n, . 11 8, at 14 dole to 15 dole for good prime. Cut meats ar t , in good supply, and the market is a shade easier ; sh n ,, o ° hi:dP, at 71c to 7i-c for dry salted and pickled 'u e rs, and Qc to ec for hams, Bacon is rather heavy boxes° 30 boxes :mug clear middl es , a t 91,- cents ; 100 fre e lo ng middles, rib in, 91 cents, delivered ei t °n boardboxes short clear middles Stcut, deliverabl e in all this mon th, ; 250 bxs. Short ddles,rib in, 9 ; and 30 bas, clear do, 10. Lard remains bid and the demand is active, port for export ; sales 2,500 ttt _ at 101 to lot cents. A sale of 30 hhds Western smoked u ° 4 was made at 9i cents. Butter and cheese are in It (Aerate request at our quoted rates. Export, from Ist to Bth February, Beef, 1856 1855 beef....... Po r k . • Id • .... ................. Itle ' • • • • (equal t o ) b egs 20 , 3 56 ...4,099 R The market is heavy and unsettled, prices still " ' li ng in : favour of purchasers, and none but prime parcels are 'wanted either for export or home use. The sales of the Week reach about 500 tierces at 4 dole 871,c to 6 dole 25e Lash. during the past week, included in the above The Chairman replied that it had been referred to the committee. but that so very short a time had elapsed since it had been referred, that only one meeting could be held, and at that meeting only two members attended• These gentlemen, themselves, entertained a strong opinion as to the character of the bill, but they did not feel competent to act in their official capacity, and submit a report on it. Mr. Steele, Vice-president of the Guardian Society, said that the committee of the society had met, and had considered the bill themselves, and also taken their solicitors' opinion on it. Mr. Reap, the secretary, had that opinion with him, and he would read it, lilt were the wish of the chamber. Mr. Reay then submitted the following opinion of Messrs. Evans & Son, solicitors to the Guardian Society, and observed that the committee, without consulting their law adviser, had come to the same conclusion in reference to the bill:— , 841 :r The market rema i ns very quiet, without arrivals or sa les since our last. CUGAR. : The m ar k et i s qu i et, but retains its firmness, and full prices are realized. PRtiouTs : With reduced supply of unengaged tonnage, consequent upon the limited number of arrivals for several 'Weeks, the market has assumed a slightly firmer tone, though the business is still tight on account of the obstruction of river l'a'ization. There is a good inquiry for vessels suitable for the Guano trade, and some charters have been made, but the 'particulars have not transpired. Most of the vessels which load here, in the various packet lines, for coastwise ports, are laid on by the owners, and of course are not under charter. The engagements to Liverpool, include 10,000 brie. Flour, at Oil—and that rate shipowrs; has been re f use d by some with ne ask 2,000 and bales C otton, closing at 7 32d., Id ed, td for Sea Island ; 2,000 pk gs lard, 25, to 27s 6d 1200 plrg3 bacon, 27s 6,1 to 309; 100 brie pork. 3s; 500' bxs cheese, 27s 6d ; measure ment goods, 206; 100 hhds tallow, on private terms ; and bv ,he Pacific, sailing this day week, 52 bales Sea Island zot ton, 9.16 d. EXCHANGE : There have been large transactions in sterling and French exchange, including bills drawn in the South a withent city endorsement—on the Continental places busi_ ness was mod e r a te, We quote bills on Lo n d on 81 to 9 per cent prem. LATEST BY TBLEGRAPH. NEW YORK. 6 p.m.—Cotton in active request at full lie advance, eb sales 5000 bales mid Upland 10},N 0 IN. —Flour in less active demand, and com. grades „declined 6+ to 12+c, sales 7000 bbls, corn. to choice and extra State 87+ to 7+, mixed to fancy Miciegan 7+ to 7+, fan c y a n d low grades extra Western 71 to B+, extra Gene see 83 to 10/, closing quiet; 400 bbls Canadian 7/ to l 0; 500 do. corn meal, Jersey 31, Brandywine 41; 200 do. rya flour sto 7 ; 5500 bus, rye 1 25 to 1 281. Wheat firmer with better demand for home consumption, white Cana 'llan, 2 10. Corn unsettled and tends downward, demand li mited —sales 26,000 bus. at 78 to 84'for new mixed white and yellows Jersey and Southern, and 80 t o 83 for old mixed Western. Oats dull, 44 to 46 and 46 to 48. Pork easier, sales 1400 bbls mess, 15 75 to 16, prime 13 8/ to 14, Old mess 15 62+. Beef lower, sales 300 bbls at 9to 9 62, country prime, 10 to $ll do. mess, 11 to 14, repacked Western, and 14 50 to 15 for extra imess. Lard ;heavy, 400 bbls 91 to 91. Dressed hogs, 7to 71. Sugars firm and quiet. Iron firm, 40 tons Scotch, 33 to 834 in lots from Yard. Tobacco firm. K y . 8 to 12. Rice : 150 tcs. 4 1 to 51g. Tallow lower. 15,000 lbs lie. Freights to Liverpool voirregular ; flour 2 5 to 2 s 6d , grain 6 to 81, cotton 7-32 to ict, to H avre nominal ; flour 70 to 75e, grain 16 to 18, cot ton 1 to 1, l ard 1. chang e d heavy and quiet. Money and Exchange ÜB, Ctl. bds. 87+; Terre Haute and Alton 2d Is_ia.n.ldte9asding 881; z 1 , 4 1; • 781; Canton 24 ; Erie RR 56+; Harlem 191; Hudson Mich. Ctl. 94; Chicago and Rock ; Cleveland and Toledo 78e; Galena and Chica. Igo Ll 3; Mich, Southern 994 A special meeting of the chamber of commerce, was held at eleven o'clock on Saturday, for the purpose of tak ing into consideration the government bill for amending the law of partnership; (limited liability). There was a large attendance. The chair was taken by the president, Charles Holland, Esq., and among the other members present were Messrs. Heath, Torr, Bushell, Macfie, Sheil a Farnworth, Hubback, Reay, Steele, Bennett4RobertsoD, Dixon, Lamont, Sw:nton Boult, Fisher, F. Boult, Kelly, Gill, Cooke, Bibby, Jackson, Lister, Holderness, Johnson' Forget, Tomlinson, Prowse, Frost, Pickering, Walker, Lang, Beazley, Lamb, Heyworth, Boyd, Anderson, Mon dell, Summers, and Rawlins. The Chairman said, he supposed they were all convers ant with the bill, which was the immediate object of their meeting that day to consider. ,He was very glad the council had at once acceded to the desire of the requisi tionists, and he trusted that the meeting that day would really afford them an opportunity of doing what he thought the chamber of commerce here was bound to do, to consider most attentively a bill of so much importance as the bill now presented to them. The gentlemen who waited on him with that requisition, expressed a feeling which he was sure would be concurred in by every mem ber of the chamber. The feeling expressed by these gentlemen to him, and which he was sure would be con curred in by all present, was that, inasmuch as the legis lature last session had, despite the difference of opinion which existed among the mercantile community, chosen to adopt the principle of limited liability iu the act which was the law of the land, ii was extremely desirable on the present occasion, when there was presented to them likewise a new bill on the same principle, called the partnership amendment bill, that the chamber should give it a" cairn and dispassionate examination and considera tion, and endeavour, if possible thereby, to obtain the highest degree of benefit which such an act was capable of, at the same time rendering it as innocuous as possible where it might be prejudicial to the community. He had to congratulate the members of the chamber that on this occasion, he trusted and hoped, they had all met having merely one object in view. Gentlemen would recollect the h last year they had unfortunately the abstract question of limited liability, which was the great bone of contention, and, unfortunately, on that occasion, the council and th e chamber at large took different views. Now, he hoped and trusted that in these proceedings that day the chamber and the council would be enabled to act harmoniously in one united effort to improve the measure, and make it as really workable and beneficial a measure as possible. With some further observations, the chairman concluded stating that he would reserve any remarks on the principle of the bill before them until another opportunity, and called upon any gentleman who had an opinion to offer; to address the meeting. The secretary then read the bill. Mr. Macfiie asked if the bill had been 'referred to the law committee of the council of the chamber, and, if so, what their opinion of it was ? LAW OF PARTNERSHIP. Commerce—court, 21st Feb. 1856. Dear Sir,—We have looked over the bill which purports to be one to " amend the law of partnership." We think the first clause of it is fraught with mischief. It would enable men to set up in business under cover of another name. If it succeeded, they would pocket the profits ; if a failure, they would withdraw their capital, and leave their creditors only the man of straw. It would be impos sible, by any vigilance, to ascertain whether any concern was genuine, or a sham. At present this fraud is imprac ticable, because the fact of sharing profits, attaches the indefinite liabilities of partnership. With respect to the second clause, the law at present is, that .a servant, or agent, if he is to be paid by a share of the profits, as such, incurs all the responsibilities of a partner, but he escapes such liabilities if he is to be paid a sum of money as a salary which will be equal in amount to a given share of the profits. The pecuniary emoluments in both cases are precisely the same. For the above reasons we think the first clause a very dangerous one, and the second an unnecessary one.—We are, &e., EVANS AND SON To the Chairman of the Committee of the Liverpool Guardian Society, Mr. Torr moved the following resolution :—" That it is the opinion of this chamber that the bill introduced into parliament entitled a Bill to amend the law of partner ship,' is fraught with evil of the greatest magnitude to the true interests of commerce, and to the credit of this country. He said that the bill they were met to discuss contained but three clauses, one of which was explanatory of one of the preceding ones, and therefore he thought they would not have any difficulty at arriving at some thing like the meaning of what the two substantive clauses were. He coincided in what had fallen from the chairman in the regret he expressed as to the difference of opinion that arose in the chamber on the more general question of limited liability, but although the discussion on it had extended to a very great length, and had occu pied the chamber not less than three days, .yet he held that the discussion had not been useless, nor the time so occupied misspent. (Hear, hear.) The principle of limited liability had received the sanetion'of the legisla. ture in a certain form, and it was the ditty of the chamber to bow to that decision. But now came the addenda, for in this, the very next, session of parliament, they were asked to sanction a further extension of the measure, which, at first, it was thought only applied to joint-stock companies and to bodies, the shares of which should be of a certain value. They were now asked to sanction its extension in one of its provisions to private individuals, and to undertakings in which the capital was not a bona Ms subscription by shares, but in which a party might advance to another a sum of money either in his own name or in the name of another, to share in his profits without himself taking any risk whatever. He, therefore, would ground his first objection to the measure on this point—That there was no publicity or registration required as to who the party was who advanced the money, what was the' amount of money he so advanced, and for how long such sum of money was to be'advanced ; and that, consequently, he was playing fast and loose with the party to whom the money was so advanced. With that money, the party who received it would obtain a certain amount of credit ; and, so long as • the concern went on profitably, all was well:; but when adversities befell it, who would be the first to be informed of the change in their circumstances ? The party who advanced the money, and he naturally looking to self-interest, as all men would do, would secure himself by obtaining back the loan he made. (Hear, hoar.) H e th oug h t there would be no difference of opinion as to that objection to the pre sent bill, because, on the discussion of the general question of limited liability, they had been told by the various gentlemen who spoke in favour of it that it would be hedged round by safeguards in every form of publicity. He would read an extract from the speech of one of those gentle men :—" Gentlemen are really frightening themselves in the anticipation of evils which would have no existence, for the provisions of the law would of themselves be ade quate to guard against the occurrence; of such dangers. This is not the place to enter into details, but it may be stated, that in any law regulating limited liability part nerships, two great safeguards would be ensured. The one is, publicity —the fullest publicity. Ever such com pany would ha ve t o declare its capital, its pa y rtners, and the duration of the partnership: the same to be inserted in a local register, free of access to"any one ; and some- Tpsryway one some thing might be added to the titl e o f the firm by which this persons might k wouldnow whether s w h as with limited h t 4 or rnot means o In f and granted credip j u dging for themselves i how far it would be safe to give themselves, and no t t t u o tiw t an es ; and, if they erred in judgment, credit to such corn h i e se p l y r , ov th is e ion bi s a o m f e th m e u l s a t w a . tta cH ch ea t r o , penalties for any revsaf?guard consists in having adequate lent act, or by nonaston of the law, whether by a fradu two precautions womnpliance with its provisions, These meet it very much bettertntelet the whole of the case, and after this it be said that suchi'tnaanyn now in force. If would prevail under limited 17adli uch improper practices very same thing may be done nowfiitY, I reply that the facility, under the law of unlimited liability. even greater heard it urged, as an hat th e e have withdrawn after it was declared Wl, ital might be now, and nobody be the wiser ?" He it torr) dewed reply yes, but then the partnership would have rendered him liable, while in the bill before them there was no liability attaching to the party advancing the money. (Hear, hear.) But to finish the extract:—" Cannot a capitalist now advance money to a concern at a high rate of interest, and when adverse eircoms4nees arise (of which he would be sure to have early information) with draw it ; or, if he left it in the concern, he allowed to rank on the estate with other creditors, who, perhaps, trusted the house solely because they know it was backed by a man of means (Hear, hear.) Could this happen in a limited liability concern ? Certainly not. In that ease the capital ad v the benefit auce w 90 , 41 an asset for of the creditors, and not a . liability." That was his first objection to objection was that thoro was no notice of withdrawal NORTHERN TIMES.---LIVERPOOL, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1856 required, and through it the greatest opportunities would be afforded to commercial dishonesty and to the breaking down of that confidence between the banker, the merchant, and the trader in their dealings, from the simple fact that the lender having withdrawn his money the ostensible party would be trading on a false capital and under a false name. (Hear, hear.) His third objection was that while on the general discussion the advocates of limited liability argued that it, would only apply to firms or to joint-stock companies and not to individuals, in this bill they saw it applied to the case of individuals, and in a still more latitudinarian principle it was applied to joint stock companies. He never yet knew a man who bad a prosperous business anxious to turn it into a joint-stock company or into any concern with limited liability, though indeed they now heard of such cases ; but on the other hand it was said that there were many men who having good concerns were yet limited in their means and cramped in their resources, and that they might be anxious to obtain funds under the conditions set out in the bill. In reply to that he would say that if a man so circumstanced were truly honest, intelligent and indus trious, he had a source already provided where he could get money. He could go to his banker, who was generally a shrewd man, and with a large knowledge of men and the world, and he could obtain from him money, and also advice and counsel much better than from the man who, putting, say .£5OOO into the concern would suggest "go and trade and if you make a profit I will share, and if you lose you will then give my money back again." How many con cerns did they not know that were already half bankrupt and, what shifts were made to recover them--the parties being buoyed up with the nope that they could now turn them into joint-stock companies' or into limited liability concerns. The measure was not long passed, and yet three or four such attempts had come to his own knowledge. He knew one or two concerns that were propped up by such a hope ; in one instance the change had been effected, but he would not anticipate results which would be known hereafter. Under those circumstances he was confident that. no one however enamoured he might be with the system of limited liability could allow the present bill to pass with out the strongest. remonstrance against the total want of protection in it to the public and the premium which it held out to fraud. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Christopher Bushell said : I have great pleasure, Mr. Chairman, in seconding the resolution which has been moved by Mr. Torr, because I believe that the language of that resolution is perfectly full of truth, when it says that the bill as introduced by Mr. Lowe, is fraught with evils of the greatest magnitude, to the true interests of commerce, and the credit of the cosntry. I shall cer tainly, cndeavour as far as possible, to act upon the sug gestion of my friend Mr. Torr, and be as brief as I can, for I agree with him that we are not to enter into the question of, joint stock partnership, but to confine our selves to the-probable action under the bill, which I think opens the whole question of limited liability. I shall therefore address myself to that especially. It seems to me, sir,"that Mr. Lowe's bill--although this may seem to be a paradox—if carefully looked into,-will clearly appear to be either the result of the grossest ignorance, or of the most acute subtlety. It is the result of the grossest ignor ance if those who framed it, did not see that it opened up the whole question of limited liability, and gave per mission to every man to do almost every thing he pleased ; and it is the result, and the indication of the most acute subtlety, if it was intended under two simple clauses of that kind to pass under such a disguise, this bill which will open the whole question of limited liability, while it seems to be a bill merely for the permission of loans without restriction. Now, sir, our position as regards the existing law, is this, that every partner is liable for the last pound and the last acre. As regards loans, since the usury laws ware repealed, a man can borrow any sum - of money he can get, at any fixed rate of interest. The security in relation to that freedom is this, that no man who has any status, or is possessed of any capital, would like to have it appear that he was lending money at an exorbitant rate of interest, even supposing that he could find any man fool enough to borrow it. Ido not think that any man of capital and standing would be , fbol enough to put himself in such a position, that it might be said of him, and brought against him, that he lent money . at 20 or 25 per cent interest. But, under this bill, that result might be producecl without such a man involving -himself in the penalties of having such a charge made against him. - Now, sir, what is the amended bill ? I believe the amended bill to be an embodiment of the Most dangerous character of a principle, which I think to be as dangerous as the embodiment of it. I believe, in my heart, that it would have been found extremely difficult to put limited liability in a shape more subtle and more dangerous, more likely to be passed over, and not to be seen or understood, than the shape in which it comes before us under this bill. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, what does it permit ? It permits the existence of a system of loans, it - permits a system of unlimited private partner ships, without any restrictions of any kind whatsoe v e r . There is no Gazette, no registration, there is no penalty for fraudulent withdrawal, and yet I can prove to you very simply, that the working of the bill will throw open the whole question of limited liability. Even if the money were withdrawn on the eve of bankruptcy no penalty attaches 'to it in the slightest degree. Mr. Torr has already addressed himself to that point, and therefore I shall not enlarge upon it. Now under that simple clause we have the freedom, certainly, which was so strongly contended for by many gentlemen who spoke on the side to which I was opposed at the last meeting. Here we have a freedom which I hope will satisfy the most insatiable desire for liberty. The title of the bill should rather have been to abolish, than to amend, partnership. (Hear, hear.) For in point of fact, excepting in such cases as will readily occur to us all, there would be no necessity for any man who desires to share in the profits of a trade to enter into a partnership. He has only to lend his money, and a similar result is achieved without the liabilities and risks to which he would be subjected under an ordinary partnership. We can therefore very readily see that partnerships would, to a very great extent, cease, and that a system of loans would be the result of such a bill as this. I contend that we have in partnerships, to a certain extent, something like the mar riage bond, although not for life, and only for a fixed period. We have in the law of partnership something like a very great security for the integrity and the well-doing of the partners in the concern. I am not now assuming that they should be men of'character, but I am speaking of partnerships under ordinary circumstances. I say that there is a considerable amount of security in partnership itself, inasmuch as two men who are brought together for a fixed period must to some extent conduct themselves with something like right feeling towards each other. But if you get rid of that bond and make the tie dissoluble, the very moment you do so by a system of laws, you get rid even of that security under the form of partnership. It has been urged against the existing law that the loans can be withdrawn. Now, sir, it is perfectly true that the loans can be withdrawn, and we know that they are withdrawn, and we know that great evils have existed from 'the withdrawal ;of loans, but no law is perfect, and do not let us, because we know one law which does not act perfectly, substitute for that law a worse law, which will act more imperfectly, and open thefrioor to a variety of frauds. I am not contending that the present law acts perfectly. No law which can be framed is perfect in action, for laws are made by fallible men, and therefore the result must be fallible. But. then you must admit that under the present system we have this security with regard to loans that, as I told you before, no man of character would venture to exact a rate of interest which would bring him into discredit if it were known, even if he could find any one fool enough to pay the amount. Under the present system the lender of money at interest will have no interest init beyond the fixed payment he is to receive to induce him ; therefore, as no profit can result to him from over-trading, he will take the greatest precautions as to the character of the man to whom he entrusts his money. That is the natural result. He has no interest beyond a certain fixed amount, which, in any case, he is to receive, and he, therefore, exercises the greatest caution as to the man to whom he entrusts his money; Now, we all know that money is is power, and like every other power, its danger or its utility results from its application. If you have under the present sys • tem a security that' that power is not to be entrust Id to a man, so far as we can possibly guard against it, so as to give him the means of inflicting injury;upon the public, your present law, p,O tante), is a safeguard to the public. But, supposing that by this bill you admit a system of loans which shall thus precisely reverse the effects-4f instead of inducing caution upon the part of the lender of the money as to the party with whom he shall enter into such an arrangement in order that he :may obtain for himself the greatest amount of profit, 'you have then the reverse' inducement, which is that, while exercising, of course, so much prudence as will enable him to secure his money from being lost, yet at the same time does give him an inducement to stimulate his partner in such employment of the capital as may give him the largest amount of per tentage, I think the result must be perfectly clear. Now, then, let us suppose for a moment, 'very briefly, what woad be the working of the bill. There is nothing like names, in order to impress the principles of the matter on our memory, therefore, we will suppose a Mr. Young—for this bill is intended chiefly to benefit the young and energetic man, and also intended to enable the capitalist, without undue risk of his whole capital, every pound and every acre, to assist the young man, by a limited amount, taking a limited share of the profits, thus opening the question of limited liability-- Mr. Young associates himself with Mr. Rich, and the firm becomes Young and Company. I will take four illustra tions, but they shall be very brief. In this first illustra tion, we will assume them both to be men of honesty. Mr. Rich is known to be a man of capital. Mr. Young is an energetic, industrious man. There is no prohibition in this bill, which shall prevent Mr. 4ich, w h o i s k nown to be worth 50,00 1 ., or 106,000/., from appearing in the counting-house of Mr. Young, taking an active part in the management cif the business—l will assume, although the bill does not say so, that he shall net atta c h hi s name to the signature of the firm. But according to this last clause, under whatever name he calls himself, either as servant, manager, director, or friend of Mr. Young, it is perfectly clear that he may appear in the counting-house, and take an active part in advice, if not indeed in the management of the concern. (Hear, hear.) Now, look' at the effect of this. Impress upon your mind the fact, that Mr. laical is known to be worth 50,0001., or 100,0001., is to what ex t en t i s no t i mewl4 , in the firm of M r. Young. openly avowed to be interested to some extent a t l eas t, large He appears there with all the prestige which belongs to his Possessions, and the firm goes on trading. Well, now, I shall a ssume of course, because the law is only brought into action i n th e , event o f a f a il ur e, that, und er some cir cumstances, although both men are honourable—for there may he nothing distumourable in a failure—the firm fails. They fail He says, ,F had .` than 5,00Q7 in the c once r n . I What then turns out with regard to Mr. Rich? never more says, "I removed it ; it is true it is lost. It has occurred in unfavourable trade; my money is gone. lam very sorry, but still I have fulfilled my engagements to the utmost. I l ent 5,0001. I controlled the trading to the c utout extent of my ability, and to the best of my power, but I am very sor ry, that although I only lose 16,0001, you, gen- tlemen, have lost 20,0001." (Hear, hear.) Now, I will assume that Mr. Young is prudent, and that Mr. Rich onehyi.lnsMelfr. isY oulenggallhyavliinaghlae a character,wants goodinterest er knowing estfor his th m t for all he is worth, (and that is his charact er —th e most important part of any man,) is anxious to g o on s t eadily a and carefully in the prosecution of his business. He might go on thus for years, but Mr. Rich says to him, " this will never do—l am only getting 10 per cent for nr• money; you must enter into such a business as w i ll give me a larger result. Mr. Young, who, und er th e old system, would have been a prudent and a prosperous man is, under this system, stimulated by Mr. Rich, (of whose character I shall not say anything,) he is taunted, and told that if he does not make the concern more prosperous, the capital will be withdrawn ; he h as a w if e and children, perhaps young like him se lf, d e p en d an t upon him; he is compelled and forced, in order to pay a higher rate of interest, to give up his prudence and his character, and seek to make large profits for Mr. Rich. I need not describe the result. Now let us take a third illustration. Mr. Rich has been deceived in Mr. Young. Mr. Rich is a capitalist- and an honest man, and associates himself with Mr. Young, whom he took out of a friend's counting house, the friend having a good opinion of the young man. and sets him up in business. I will take it that Mr. Rich may or may not appear in the counting-house, but he is known to be associated with Mr. Young. Inconsequence Of Mr. Rich taking his ease Mr. Young rushes into large speculations. Mr. Rich loses his £5,000, and the public suffer. That would not have been the case under a system of unlithited liability. He was tempted to Join the firm by the facility of limited liability. Now the fourth case I assume is one even more dangerous and injurious in its consequences. I will presume them both to be unprincipled scamps—and you will agree with me that both among the rich and the young such men are to be found. (Hear, hear.) Now, if you can conceive such an alliance as that of the young and the rich, both regardlesQ of character, you may easily understand, for your imagi nations will fill up more than I have time to describe, how these two men will make it work under such a bill as this. Mr. Rich is an old stager, and he has gone through a long process of careful and cautious villainy. H e says —" Now, my good friend, we will begin fairly. I lend you £lO,OOO, and you will go in as corn merchant. You go into the corn market and buy and pay, and buy and pay, and make yourself a character which shall be unmistakeable. In fact, Mr. Young, I will give you the plating of my bullion, which we will make very useful by and bye, and as there does not happen to be an assay-office where you could be tested, I have no doubt we can make things very comfortable." They do go to work. For years Mr. Young's character is gradually growing into reputation for: caution and ready money transactions. Suddenly, when the right time comes, when war has ceased or war is about to break out, or at some critical period or other, Mr. Rich says " now, my boy, now is our time, I have made you a credit. You will not be suspected. Wherever you have got credit go and use it. It it turns out well, you and I understand each other, if ill, you shall not be the worse for it. I will lose my.£lo,ooo, if .I don't draw it out—but we will take very good care that I do." Well, now, gentlemen, we will pass on. Do you see how very easily clerks may be with drawn from their employer's service to carry on such pro jects as this ? Just think of it and you will see that this is one of the great evils which will result from this bill. Well, it has been asked, "is a young man the worse for having £2,000 or .e 3,000 ? " I say he is not worse, if the money be his own, or be lent to him at a fixed rate of inte rest, so that prudence and caution are not interfered with. But I do maintain that he is worse if you give him £2,000 or .€3,000 under the system of this bill. He is no longer his own master. He can no longer exer cise that prudence and discretion which may belong to his own natural and personal 'character. It has been said that under the limited liability law much capital ,would come into trade which is diverted from it in consequence of the great risks which capitalists under the former system had to incur. Gentlemen, is there any such thing as another side to the question ? Can you not conceive how a great deal of capital may be with drawn, supposing such a system as that introduced by this bill to prevail? There is nothing like a home illus tration—suppose the case of our respected friend, Mr. William Brawn. We know very well that he is get ing old, we know very well that he has undertaken parliamen tary duties. Some of us know very well that if he could ho would retire from business. Now does any one pretend to say that if he retired from business commerce would be the better for it ? Does any one pretend to say that an increased amount of capital would be brought into trade ? I maintain the reverse. It may be true - that some inexperienced capital would be brought in, and inexperi enced persons who had better put their money into the Funds at a fixed rate of interest. But trade and commerce lose all his capital, his experience, his caution, his inter;- -city, from which has resulted the immense wealth he possesses ; and not only is his wealth lost:but also the elements I have spoken of, which have produced that wealth. This is one of the effects which would be pro duced by such a law as this. If it be said that Mr. Brown would not go out of business, I have no answer to that. If he stays in it, that which was most earnestly desired for those who wished to retire from business, is not applicable in that case—he does not get the advantage you desire to give him by this law. Now, I ask, why should not government, if money be a power, undertake legislation in relation to such a power as well as to every other power? I believe there is some law to prevent a steamboat company putting more than a certain amount of pressure upon their boilers when they carry passlngers. Now, I say this is to protect the ignorant and apathetic. Government steps in and says to the steamboat proprietors, "we will not allow you to go as fast as you might--we will protect the public who are mixed up with you in your boats." I say money is a motive power, and government is decidedly bound to protect the public in relation to such a power as that, and not to throw open, as the bill does, the :unrestricted exercise of that power. (Hear, hear.) I agree with the president of our cha m b er that this is not a party question, and that we are all equally bound, as merchants, who have all the same interests —and who can doubt that we have all the same good intentions I—to endeavour that a bill shall be framed which shall be beneficial to the commercial community. (Hear, hear.) I would scorn to ceal with the question as a mere partl-question. I feel that we should r Tard it as a great social and moral *SINS." If you will receive my words, weak as they are, with any thing like power, do believe me at least, however ill guided I may be—do believe me, and those who act with me, to be sincere. (Hear, hear.) Believe this, for there we have a good starting-point, that we will not be actuated by any party feeling whatever, but really by the desire that the commerce of this country may have the highest standard, by which to be measured, a standard of the highest honour and integrity. I am sure we all feel that the commercial standard is far too low at present. Events are occuring every day-„I need not use names—which demonstrate it. We have had failures in the town of Liverpool lately —I say, if the moral standard of commerce had been as high as it should have been, the persons who failed ought not to have failed, for they ought never to have had the credit, after all they had gone through, which gave them the power so to act, as to cause men to commit the most fearful acts which can be conceived. I say we should raise and not lower our commercial standard. (Hear, hear.) I mast sp ea k o f these things. Let us standard we can i n commercial transactions, and shall respect ou rse l ves and our. fellow-men. I am happy w highest say, maintain ou r integrity, and let us maintain the to know that the Chamber of Commeroe of Glasgow, Manchester, and Liverpool, have all declared, not selfishly, as though for their own interest, in favour of limited lialAity, bat against it. This is a proof that there is a great deal of sound integrity in the country, and also a proof ,that they do believe, in their hearts, that evil and not good would result from it. With these few observations, I beg to second the resolution, which, I trust, will be carried by a large majority, if not with unanimity. (Hear, hear, and a pplause.) Mr. B. Heath, in moving an amendment to the resolu 'ion, said that he would feel that lie was denying the senti ments which he on a former occasion expressed, if he did not take the opportunity also to state that be still held those opinions in reference to the particular form of limited liability which was proposed by the present bill ; and the reason why he thought it necessary to meet the resolution by an amendment, instead of a direot negative, was, be cause all the arguments that' had been urged against the bill had been urged almost entirely against its defects, and not against its principle, and because there was no gentle. man who, however in favour of limited liability, but would yet concur in the sentiments expressed as to the nakedness of the present bill. It was shorn entirely of those guaran tees and 'protection to the public which the.bill of last ses sion contained; but there might be differences of opinion as to how far all those guarantees were necessary. Some of them believed that all the provisions for registration to be necessary that they might be easily avoided ; but:there were many other provisions in it which the majority of men would think of preserving. The amendment which he should propose was this,-f‘ That the bill was sound and worthy of adoption ; but that provision should be made for capital lent under its clauses, remaining liable to all debts con tracted while in the hands of the borrower , also to connect responsibility strictly with ostensability, and to give facili ties to the public for ascertaining when loans were with drawn." (Hear, hear.) He considered all the objections that had been urged against the principle of capital lent on the condition of participation in the profits of trade, might lOTA, finder the open system as it at present exi s ted, an d that the illustrations of Mr. Bushell were' ad captandum ones, be equally appli e d, an d p er h a p s w ith more t ru th t o capital presented.to them in a form calculated to excite their prejudices against the bill ;—(cries of " hear, hear," and " no, no)"—but then other illustrations might be presented _ _ to thetri which would show the results of capital borrowed t Under the act in a different aspect, and in a manner calculated to engage their sympathies in favour of the principles of the bill. (Hear, hear.) Upon a former occasion he did present a few illustralions which he would venture to read : "Suppose two firms, A. B. and Po., and Y. Z. and Co. commencing hu , iness at the same time, the forther with unlimited liability, and the latter as a partnership en oommandite, and both seeking public patron age and support. On being questioned by parties with whom they sought to do business, A. B. and Co. explain that they have only a small capital of their own, but that they had a friend at their back who had lent them £lO,OOO though at rather a high rate of interest, five ten per cent, or as the case might be; that they were under promise to give him security over all the goods they might hold wh en required ; that the loan might be withdrawn on very abort notice, and should they be unfortunate before that Gould be effected, their friend would rank on their egtate as a creditor. On the other hand, Y. Z. and Co. explain that they also had a small capital, but they bag boorowed £lO,OOO from five of their relatives en corn mandite, that is to say, it was to share the profit or loss, but it could not be withdrawn for five years, and should misfortune overtake them in the mean time, the lenders could not rank as creditors. Now, with which of these firms would it be safest to enter into business? He himself should not hesitate a moment in preferring Y. Z. and Co." It appeared to him clearly that partnerships en comrimndiie formed under the principle of the capital participating in the profits of the business, combined with certain checks and guarantees, would decidedly be the safest for the public, and although there might be cases where fraud was de signed, or where there was great rashness or want of proper mercantile integrity and honesty, yet he contended that they were the exceptions. (Hear, hear.) It was a libel on tha mercantile community at large to say that part nerships under the provisions of the present bill, would not be made as honestly and as bona fide an intention as partnership formed under the existing regulations—(hear, hear,)—and he contended that with proper provisions they would be safer than the system under which they at present acted. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Dixon seconded the amendment. He said he thought that in the first place they had gone somewhat beyond the object at which the bill seemed really to aim ; they had gone off into the question of limited liability when, perhaps, the bill itself it cr i t i c i se d di d not purport so much. All that it purported was somewhat of a negative character. It provided that whereas hitherto participation in profits or as a muneration for the loan of money involved a partnership in the eye of the law of the land, whether so designed or not, in future such participation in profits and losses should not involve a partnership. That was about the extent of the bill. (Hear hear.) Now be for his own part had no objection to the bill simply as it stood, but at the same time he should say that it did bear incidentally on the question of limited liability, and probably required some safeguards, It might be wisa to say a little more than the bill said ; and as that to some extent necessarily brought them into the question of limited liability, he would make a few remarks in answer to the objections urged in the matter. Most of the objections that day, which ware against the principle of limited liability, or rather of limited liability without safeguards, or the ability of a capitalist to lend a portion of his money and participate in profit and losses without incurring a partnership, went to the effect that the borrower of the money would receive a credit to which he was not entitled, t nd so perpetrate a fraud and a swindle on the public. Now in all the cases that Mr. Bushell had put as illustrations, it appeared to him (llfr. Dixon), that there was one great omission. He did not at all consider what the parties before trusting "Mr. Young" would do. (Hear, bear.) They tniAt give him credit, but would they not first ascertain what means he had to repay them ? (Hear, hear. They would find out that a certain " Mr. Rich" had lent him money, but was it a sufficient reason that they should trust him because he had received a loan of money, which he was liable to be called on for under the first adverse circumstances ? He was certain that in his commercial experience he had never seen credit given to such a person tinder such circumstances, and he doubted whether any body else had. (Hear, hoar.) He should say it is ail very well, Mr. Young, that you have the present use of this money, but I have no guarantee that it will remain in yonr possession, and liable to your obligatons to the extent of the time of the credit you ask of me. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Young might respond that he was sure !Ir. Rich was such a friend of his that in the event of loss ho would not ask for his money when all of his (Mr: Young's) creditors would want. He might say that, and think so, but most certainly any party would decline to give him credit on such a repre sentation—(Hoar, hear)—and therefore Mr. Bushell's illustrations failed. That was not the principle of limited liability—the principle was where a capitalist publicly acknowledged himself to be liable for a certaim amount of money, which he could not withdraw until the expiring of the term of partnership, when all the liabilities of the debtor were contracted Mr. Bushell remarked that that was not the principle of the bill before them, and it was to it ho had applied his remarks. Mr Dixon continued : He would take them on that ground if they were dealing only with the bill, and would say that the bill made no provision for any partnership under limited liability or any other form. There was rather a misnomer in the heading of the bill. Instead of being entiled " a bill for the amending of the law of partnership," it ought to be called "a bill for amending the law of interest"--a bill providing "that whereas the receiving of a varying and fluctuating rate of interest had hitherto involved a partnership, it should no longer do so." On that ground alone the merits of the bill should be discussed, but inasmuch as other persons considered that it involved the question of limited liability generally, which, no doubt, it incidentally affected, and would not take it on its honest merits in what it plainly said, he was willing to meet them and to provide which would ensure safeguards, and which would result in establishing in one form or other something like those which limited liability ought to bring with it. The law now as at present in force admitted that to be done in a circuitous mode of action, which the bill before Them sought to have done directly. They knew that parties might now lend money at rates of interest contingent on the profits to be made out of it. (Hear, bear.) And Mr. Lowe in the speech with which he introduced the bill, stated that two of the judges of the land had affirmed the principle, that a person rmight lend mon e y un d er b on d to i receive fifty per cent. on t, the condition of the bond, how ever, to be fulfilled in case the borrower paid to him ten per cent., or fifteen per cent, as it might be of his profits. Where then was the d:fr Tence between the two systems ? There was none. (Hear, hear.) But he thought it would be better if that which could now be done circuitously, and by the introduction of a few amplifying words, were done straightforwardly and openly. (Hear, hear.) What was the nature of interest ? It was part of the profits that could be made out of the money. And what was the legal rate of interest—a composition between the chances of making no interest, or making a loss. or of making a very heavy He of interest ; in a word, It was the average composition of the rates of interest. On that account, some persons, in stead of leaving the matter subject to fluctuations, proton ed to have a certain fixed rate —5 per cent. or 6 per cent. ; hut he wished to know what was the difference between that system and that under which a man could lend his money on condition of sharing in the profits of the borrower iThat is, if the borrower made 8 per cent., he would retAve a certain proportion ; if only 4 per cent., then only a certain other proportion. (Hear, hoar.) Mr. Bushell explained that Mr. Dixon had misunderstood the tenor of his argument. He had spoken of money lent at a fixed rate of interest. and had urged that men would hesitate to lend out 20 per cent., because it would be a slur _ _ on them, while they would not hesitate to take as large rate in profits. _ _ lfr. Dixon, in conclusion, urged that it would be foolish to expect that any provision introduced into an act could protect them as merchants and traders, if they would not themselves look after their own interest. Mr. Lamont suggested the adoption of the following' amendment—"P That the principle of the partnership amend ment bill, permitting the lender of money to receive re muneration, contingent on the profits to he made out of it by the borrower; although good in itself, and by itself, yet requires, in the opinion of this chamber, a provision, that the lender, under the bill, should have no right in bankruptcy, as against the assignee of the borrower; and also, that any one knowingly using a name or designation, or representing' other than the aotual partners to be partners, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour." The Chairman thought the first amendment left the question open for any such suggestion to be embodied. Mr. Robertson asked whether the meaning of the tug gestion of Mr. Lamont was that the lender should not rank equal to the other creditors upon the estate, but that his claim should b 3 postponed until all the other creditors were satisfied. Air. Lamont said that was precisely the meaning of his amendment. On the suggestion of the Chairman, Mr. Lamont did not press his amendment. Mr. Swinton Boult agreed with Mr. Dixon. that parties would be enabled to do by a direct contract what they now accomplished by a circuitous route, and he thought there could be no more objection to making the return for capital lent defendant upon the profits or losses of a concern, by allowing an actual share in the profit or losses, than there was to allowing a rate of interest to be calculated on the profits or losses afterwards to be ascertained. Bnt what he objected to was, that any confusion should be introduced into what constituted a partnership • and he did not think that bill gave to the lender ofm° lent' his money, money, under the bill, any right whatever as a partner. He and the only change which the bill made in his relations was, that he should be dependant for the return of the money upon the result; of the trading. He retained to himself all the rights and privileges of a creditor, just exactly the same as if he took the return of his interest, as a compensation for what the profits might be. Therefore, the members of the chamber were not, he thought, in voting upon the bill, voting pro or CO2I, in reference to the law of limited liability. (Hear, hear.) Under th ese circums'ances, he confessed he felt very considerable difficulty in voting either for the resolution or for the amendment. He saw no objection whatever to loans of that description, so long as the character of the individual who advanced the money was maintained strictly to be that of a lender. All he was anxious for was, that the two characters of partner and lender should be kept clearly and explicitly distinet, and that the question should not be involved in any difficulty of determining whether a man was a lender or a partner. His objection to the title was, that it did, not sufficiently define what the character of partner would be, when the great cardinal distinction was removed. The only expla nation they could infer was, that when a man became a member of a firm, signed as of the firm, used the rights of a parter in frequenting the counting-house, and taking an active part in the business, he then became a partner—and that was the only test left to them. If the di s ti n ction between partner and lend er were ma i nta i ne d c l ear ly, he could see no objection w h a t ever to the bi ll b roug ht j a by Mr. Lowe. Mr. Fisher expr esse d a h ope t h at t h e effect of the legisla tion would not be so much to protect the rich and the few, as the poor and the many. He greatly feared that the protection given was to those who did not need it, and that the poor, industrious, third parties would be left unpro tected. If they legislate at all, he contended they should legislate for the protection of the poor and industrious people, who did so much to promote the wealth of the country, and to keep the wealth there, while legislation was driving it away to other countries. He did not see how it was possible to support either the resolution or the amendment. It was a bill to tempt the timid, unsuspecting, capitalist to join with the adventurous schemer —not to protect the people who ought to be protected, but to protect those who ought not to require it, and did not require it. lie declared that the principle of the gambler was a higher principle than that of the bill, and he trusted the chamber would not make themselves parties to clothe a bill so naked and so deformed. Mr. Maefie said, the unanimous feeling was, that the bill was not satisfactory. He accused the council of not having evinced sufficient attention in examining the bill, which had been before the commercial world for more than a fort night. He declared that, day and night, they should have been examining the bill, studying it incessantly, so that they could lay before the chamber that day their matured opinion upon it. Had the chamber not existed, no doubt others would have studied it. A firm of the greatest position in the legal world told them that the bill was one of a most dangerous, and he supposed he might add iniquitous, character. Mr. Real : Not quite ; not so far as that. Mr Macro? : I allude not to the opinion of the Guardian Society's solicitors, but to one addressed to a private individual. Mr. Bushell : " It would be the most dangerous innova tion possible," that is the opinion. Mr. Heath objected to introducing the opinions of law yers. He thought the value of the chamber depended upon its expressing the opinions of mercantile men. If they became the mere mouthpiece of lawyers, they should lose their value and might as well dissolve. (Hear, hear.) Sr. Macfie charged the Council with having failed to take the proper means, or rather with having taken no means at all, to ascertain the character of the bill. For the three or four faults which had been pointed out in it, he could point out a dozen. Let them carry unanimously to-day the resolution that the bill would not do, and they could subsequently consider what amendment should be suggested. Mr. Alderman Bennett conceived that the bill was fraught with great danger to the trading community. He took the second view suggested by Mr. Bushell, and considered it a most subtle and dangerous bill. The word " person " was introduced in the second clause three times, and what were they told it was ? That it included partnership, firm, joint stock company, and corporation. What was easier for a rich man than to raise up a man of Straw to stand before the public for the purpose of working his capital without risk ? If the thing turned out unfortunately, the capitalist could, before it had gone too far, withdraw his money. Credit to a largo amount might have been obtained, and if the public were such fools as to give credit, the con sequence would he that they would lose every farthing. Ile thought the first resolution comprehended fully every thing which could be said in detail or argument upon the bill; that, in fact, it was the cream of all that could be said, and condensed into a few words the real nature of the bill. He thought, therefore, that the only safe course to adopt was that which the resolution recommended to them. He joined with Mr. Maci,e in expressing regret that the council had not fully considered the I. ill, and laid the matured result of their opinion before the geeeral council that day. The Chairman observed that he believed all would agree that the less interference there was of law, in all bargains between man and man, the better, They knew that, under the present system, the lender of money had the sanction of the law for receiving a certain fixed rate of interest, but they knew, likewise, of a number of incidents connected with that mode of lending money which were very disad vantageous to the public. (Hear, Lear.) Not a day passed in which experience did not show that the lender, in the majority of cases, was not actuated by that high principle which should govern all men in their dealings, but that, actuated by the primness mobile of the human breast—self interest—he took every alvantege, and insisted on receiving not only a fixed rate of interest, 5 per cent, or 6 per cent., but that the borrower, particularly i n th e case of persons of small capital, should also deposit with him whatever securities he held, and that he should claim in all oases for a dividend on the estate. He did not say whether that principle was good or bad, but he would ask whether the system shadowed in the bill before them, with a guarantee that no preferential claim should be allowed to the lender, but on the contrary, that all creditors should be paid before any claim of his could be filed against the assets, would not ba better than the old system which he had described. (gear, hear.) Ile would also ask any commercial gentleman whether, when the two systems were before them, Mr. Rich would set up a man of less morality and character as a party to whom he would confide his money than that Mr. Young who was set up every day and with whom they were compelled to trade? hear,) He thought Mr. Rich would be just as careful in the one case as the other, and viewing the bill in that light he would recommend that the bill be sent back to the council of the chamber to endeavour to have it perfected by the introduction into it of certain clauses. In conclusion the chairman stated that the law society of London ware of opinion that the bill would be a good and safe one if two clauses were added to it—one providing that in case of bankruptcy the lender of the money should have nothing until after the full payment of all the public creditors ; and the other providing that all payments made on account of the principal to snob lending party within three months Preceding the bank ruptcy should be void as against the !said other public creditors. After some fu ether discussion the amendment was put and lost by 10 to 27. Mr. S. Boult then moved as an amendment, " that it is the opinion of this chamber that the principle of allowing money to he loaned for a share of profits and losses icstead of at a fixed rate of interest is sound, but that it be recom mended to the government to add to clauses one and two of the bill the words not to give him any of the rights to which as a partner he would be entitled." He thought that would prevent aA interference of the lender with the borrower in the conduct of his business. Mr. Summer seconded the amendment. Mr. Bushell opposed it. No legal provision could prevent the lender from interfering with the borrower. It was done, and would continue to be done, indirectly if not directly. On a show of hands the amendment was lost, Mr. Charles Robertson proposed a second amendment, to the effect, that it be an instruction to the council of the chamber to consider Mr. L;we's bill, and to prepare such provisions as they might think necessary for the practical working of it, and report the same to an adjourned meeting of the chamber. Mr. Mactie : When does Mr. Lowe's bill come on ? Mr. Robertson I cannot tell. Mr. Macfie : It comes on on Monday, and this is Saturday. The Chairman said Monday was appointed, pro forma, to go into committee upon Mr, Lowe's bill, but he thought they could pretty well guess that nothing would be done with it on Monday. Mr. Francis Boult seconded the amendment. ire observed that there could be little difference of opinion that the present state of the law was eminently unsatis factory. It afforded the minimum of protection to the industrious third creditor, and the maximum of protection to the large capitalist, who put forward a man of straw. They found, in experience every dav, that men who never Lad the smallest capital, had done business to an enormous extint, by means of large capitalists, who protected them selves at the expense of the creditors. This was a crying evil in the present law, and such arrangements had all the effect—although he did not say they were so intended—of a conspiracy to defraud, (Hear, hear.) Any alteration which would facilitate the employment of capital upon the ground of character, and not of bales of cotton, or railway stock, which could be got hold of, the capitalist oared not how, if his l< an was secured, the chamber ol!ght to look upon with the greatest favour. (Hear, hear.) If such a measure were proposed, the chamber ought do all it could to see whether it could not be licked into shape and made practicable. lie contended that Mr. Lowe's bill was an enormous amendment upon the present law —a wonderful improvement even as it stood, and that the bene fit of it would be soon found in a far healthier state of com merce than they had at present. Mr. Lamont was in favour of referring the bill back to the Fisher Mr. Ton., and other gentlemen having spoken tho council. Air. divided, wh en the amendment was lost by a s large majority. Mr. Macfie proposed a resolution to the effect that the council of the chamber of commerce be recommended to take immedi a t e act i on upon the foregoing resolutions, an 4 hat a petition embod3ing them be presented, supported by a. deputation from the council. Mr. Gill seconded the motion, Mr. Heath strongly opposed the motion on the ground that the council, who were not all in favour of the resolu tion, shou'd not be called on to carry out its vlsws, and proposed, as an amendment, that the s-cretary, assisted by the mover and seconder of the resolution, be instructed to draw up a petition in accordance with it. A long and very desultory discussion followed. as to the course which the Council was bound to take. The amend tr,nt was finally withdrawn, and the resolution passed in a somewhat modified form, the drawing up and presenta tion of the petition being entrnsted to a committee of the council' composed of the following members :—Messrs. Torr, Ilolderness, Bushell, Kelly, Parnworth, and William Brown, M.P. m r . Tomlinson proposed a moti on t o t h e effect that the bill for the incorporation and rezulation of joint stock conipanies, & c., requi re d th e vigilant attention of the trad ing commun i ty,Lnd th a t t h e council be recommended to ask for further time from th e l eg i s l ature f or t h e consi ders. tion of the complicated provisions contained in the 108 clause of the bill. ~.. This resolution was also adopted. Mr. Torr proposed a vote of thanks to the chairman, which was seconded by Mr. Bushell, and carried by accla mation. The proceedings then terminated, after a very protracted sitting of the chamber.