The Express.
London, England, 1856-06-25 00:00:00

JOINT STOCK COMPANIES BILL.

The ha;s7w—tilli;io ems asaqueoiTilii;lLlT:

Oa clean 1, •
Lord CAMPBELL declined offering any opposition or
amendments. The experiment, he believed, mum be tried,
bet he did not asticipate any very marvellous results from
it either way.
Lord OYERSTONE, who spoke is each e low toss of voice
as to he nearly inaudible in the gallery, was understood also
to decline proposing any alteration or amendment. Be
commented on the exclusion of banking companies from the
privilege of limited liability. Lord Ashburton would have
given the privilege exclusively to betaking companies. Be
(Lord 0 rerstoue j did sot complain of the 'salute* as a gran-
sae*, es he rather c ensidersd it an honour to that branch
of commerce to which be had so long had the honour to be-
long. His only object is thing wee to obtain from the Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade en erect definition of what the
bill meat by banking companies, as some meant advertise-
ment* led him to think that without very strict and imetet
definition attempts would be made at evasion of the law. Be
wished to know which eompaaies were to have and which
sot the privilege of limited liability.
Lcrd STANLEY of ALDERLEY said that the
Intention of the bill was to Gaoled' banking tromps
Wes, and for good reason, as they were subject to
peculiar regulations, might be banks of inns, in
addition to which there were various argent reasons ter
their exclusion. With legated to the diffisulty of <Lahti-
Urea of which his noble Mend complained be did not see any
difficulty in the matter, es ke had used the saute words as
those by which beaks wars excluded from the Joint Stock
Composite Act. Theis never bad been any difficulty in
diatingskbing or defining a bask, and, therefor*, he did not
see any reason for more stringent distinctions than those that

alresdi seined.
Lord MONTEAOLE was of opinion that the distinction I
should be clearly delloird.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that in the act relating
to crowed cheques which hie noble friend (Lord Monteagle)
had carried through the house, ao difficulty had been raised
about the &Antilop of a bank.
The Duke of AROYLL shortly defended the principle
of the bill, to which he said he had devoted the closest
attention.

The clause was thee agreed to, as were the subsequent
clauses to 16 inclusive
On chase 17, rearing to the register to be kept by coin-
patties,
Lord PORTMAN edd that It did not appear to him that
this clause afforded nay protection to the public. H. ter-
, thinly thought that some provision should be made for depo-
skimp • mister in some public dim.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY refined the noble
lard to the 12th clause, by which a register was to be kept
=for inspection at the office of the °rapidly. If a re-
vere kept at tome public plea there would be some
practical difficulty in noting alterations which might occur,
by Insofar of shires. and so forth.
Lord OVERSTONE Vok moult. spin to warn their
lordships against the asiechbrivous tendency of this seseure,
which ha believed would not oaly rata the thoughtless, but
shake the credit of the prudent and mations.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY reminded the house
that the principle of limited liability was no mew one. It
had been leveret times affirmed by the legislature, and the
present bill only sought to put It upon a fair and proper
beefs.
Tbs clew was agreed to, a• were also the subsequent
claws of the bill, with • few verbal amendments.
The home resumed.