The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-01-15 00:00:00

LAW REFORM.

IT is argued by some writers, who would apologise
for the neglect of our legislators in carrying out the
reforms so much needed in the law, that the fault
chiefly rests with the people at large, and that excuse
may be found in the absence of that pressure from
without which is deemed indispensable to the success
of modern legislation. This may be true to a certain
extent, and as applicable to some questions which oc-
casionally occupy the attention of Parliament, but it
cannot in fairness apply to those reforms in the admi-
nistration of the law which are more peculiarly the
province of the legal authorities of the Government.
If we take, for instance, the Limited Liability Act of
last session, it will be found that all its faults were
those of its framers, while the public had only to take
the instalment of reform which was afforded by it,
and wait until our lawgivers have leisure or inclina-
tion to render it of any value. The reform required
was to open to Joint Stock Companies the privileges
which had previously been granted in special cases by
Private Acts or by Royal Charter. The justice of
such privileges was therefore admitted, and all that
was demanded was the abrogation of that exclusiveness
which left every new company at the mercy or caprice
of the Government. Instead, however, of simply im-
posing conditions which might give a reasonable
amount of security to trade creditors, the Act required
peculiar conditions as, to number and amount of shares
which in themselves afforded no security whatever to
creditors, and by mixing up with its provisions the
clauses of the Joint Stock Companies' Act, passed in a
previous session, so clogged the measure with uncer-
tainties as to open a field for litigation, and render it
practically unavailable for beneficial purposes. If
twenty-five shareholders, of £lO each, making in the
whole only £250, might trade and limit their liability
to the amount of their shares, surely three men, hold-
ing shares of £l,OOO each, might in common fairness
do the same ; but the law requires the number of
shareholders, and makes no allowance whatever for the

largeness of the capital subscribed. The object
sought, therefore, has not been attained, while the
protection to creditors, which was alleged to be the
purpose of such conditions, is equally unaccomplished.
But for these errors the public are not to blame, nor
is it to be expected that any measure for the reform
of the law can emanate from popular agitation except
in general complaints of the imperfections of the exist-
ing system.
Last week we alluded to the want of a system by
which speedy and inexpensive redress might be ob-
tained for the many errors attaching to our commer-
cial transactions, and which might be accomplished by
the establishment of local courts, the duties of which
should be similar to that of arbitrators. The details,
however, of such an arrangement could only be or-
ganised by those conversant with such matters,
though the necessity for its adoption is not the less
urgent, as must be familiar to many who have had to
undergo the hardship and delay of an expensive suit
at law, or as an alternative submit to a manifest
injustice. When a cheap process of law was demanded
for the recovery of small debts, the County Courts
were established, which, with their defects, have ac-

complished some good, but the details of the system
were devised by legal authoritieg, as being beyond the
province of those who felt the evil, but could only
petition for a remedy. The delay and costliness of
chancery proceedings had long been a public griev-

ante ; but, while the evil was generally admitted,
little was done to remedy it, until the Conservatives
had a brief term of office, and then the legal acumen

and persevering determination of Lord ST. LEONARDS
effected more real reform, within a few months, than

had been done within a quarter of a century by pro-

fessing law-reformers.

What is really wanted are men of ability in the right
places, with skill to devise and moral courage to carry
out such improvements in the law as may prove really

beneficial, without reference to the peculiar crotchets

of this or that individual. Opposition may, no doubt,
be experienced, but there is sufficient intelligence in
either House of Parliament to give legislative consent
to measures of practical importance, without reference

to the relative strength of political parties. It is vain,
however, to wait for the pressure from without, for
though the grievance may be felt, the particular

remedy is not always so easy to be ascertained. In
all such questions the legal authorities should be in

advance of public opinion, and, relying with confidence

upon the equity of their proposals, press them upon
the attention of the legislature, and count upon the
verdict of the public being in their favour. Another
session of Parliament is now before them, and though
the affairs of the war may still be pleaded as a suffi-

cient apology for the postponement of many measures,

[JANUARY lb, 1850•

involving the comparative strength of political Par;
ties, it can form no valid excuse for the postponealeu
of such reforms in the law as all parties have agreed
to be imperatively needed.