The Sun.
London, England, 1856-02-15 00:00:00

his hon. and learned friend had proposed would never ii
finish. That was his view of the subject. He would not
say that he stood alone in entertaining it, for he had the
great advantage of having in it the concurrence of his hou.
and learned friend the Solicitor-General ; but, unfortu-
nately, they were in the minority as regarded the statute
law commission, and he therefore did not vindicate that
practical scheme as one that that commission had any
regard for. He was, however, very glad that an hou.
gentleman with such transcendant abilities as those pos-
sessed by his hon. and learned friend had come forward
with a proposition on so important a subject. And so far
from opposing the introduction of the bill, he would have
great satisfaction in seeing the hon. and leaned member
receiving any assistance which her Majesty's Government
Or any hon. member of that house could afford him iu the
good work. Although he did not think that the thing was
done in the best manner, he could assure his hon. and
learned friend that ho might calculate on any aid which
he (the Attorney-General) could give him.
Mr. S. WORTLEY expressed his gratification at the
measures proposed for the improvement of the statute law
by his bon. and learned friend the member for Suffolk.
He entirely concurred in what had been stated by his hon.
and learned friend the Attorney-General as to the senti-
ment, now so general that it might be called universal, in
favour of the consolidation of the statute law. He rather
coincided in the opinions of the hon. and learned member
for Suffolk and of the noble lord the member fur King's
Lynn than in the views of the Attorney-General, as to the
plan that should now be proceeded on to effect the object
in view. And ho thought ho might congratulate the
country on the ability,lhe perseverance, and the energy
which had induced the hon. and learned member for Suf-
folk to pledge himself to the House of Commons to carry
out, with the concurrenc) of Parliament, the task ho had
undertaken. Consolidation was in his opinion perfectly
practicable, for it introduced nothing new and therefore
raisel no question. (Hear, hear.) It was possible, there-
fore, in a deliberative assembly like the House of Com-
mons to pass a bill with a preamble somewhat to this
effect :—" Whereas, there are scattered among various
statutes various provisions on the same subject, and
whereas it is desirable (if these are to be law at all), that
all should be included in ono statute, be it therefore
enacted that these provisions be all included in this bill."
This would not pledge Parliament to details, but the
moment they attempt to codify, every question raised a
host of new principles. Ho again congratulated the hon.
and learned member on the measures he had brought for-
ward, which measures had his (Mr. S. Wortley's) concur-
rence and support. (Hear.)
Sir F. KELLY rose to say one word in explanation, in
consequence of what had fallen from his learned friend the
Attorney-General. He would take another opportunity of
noticing the general remarks of his hon. and learned friend;
but as to the question before the house, and what the At-
torney-General has said in reference to his introduction of
the measures, ho (Sir F. Kelly) begged to state distinctly
that ho was not the organ of the statute law commission.
(Hear.) Ho appeared there to propose these measures
merely as an individual—as an independent member of
Parliament. (Hear, and cheers.) It was quite true that for
the last few weeks ho had been a member of the statute
law commission ; he had attended many of its meetings ;
and his propositions had the entire sanction and approval
of every member who attended those meetings, amongst
whom he could not recollect having numbered either of his
learned friends the Attorney or Solicitor-General on any
single occasion. (Hear.) He certainly felt it due to every
member of the commission with whom ho had communi-
cated to say that he had their cordial sanction and approval
of the measures be was now bringing forward. He also
begged to state that any attempt to carry those bills
through Parliament without the aid which that commis-
sion could afford, and which it could only afford him un-
der the authority and sanction of the members of her Ma-
jesty's Government, would not, in his opinion, be success-
ful. (Hear, and cheers.)
Mr. G. PHILLIMORE did not think that any valid
argument could be adduced against such a codification of
the statute law as had been suggested by the Attorney-
General.

Sir G. GREY said that the Attorney-General had
shown that there was no difference of opinion as to the diffi-
culties arising from the present state of our statute law
, nd our common law. It was beyond all doubt that there
was a great variety and multiplying of statutes, many of
them on the same subject, scattered over an immense num-
ber of volumes ; and that hitherto no attempt had been
made at a consolidation or codification of those statutes.
As regarded consolidation, distinct from codification, his
hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General had stated
his concurrence in the proposition that consolidation should
come first and codification afterwards ; but the difference
between hon. members was as to the best mode of effect-
ing consolidation. (Hear, hear.) His (Sir G. Grey's)
opinion was that if they desired to make any effectual pro-
gress they should proceed by degrees. With all deference
to the Attorney-General and other hon. and learned mein-
bort, who were more competent to form an opinion on
the subject than he was, he was of opinion that they would
the more speedily and effectually arrive at a codification
of the statute laws by consolidating them, subject by sub-
j set, than by attempting by ono measure a complete codi-
fication of the statute law. (Hear, hear.) He thought
that the hon. and learned gentleman opposite had some-
what underrated some of the difficulties in the way of
consolidation. For instance, that which would arise in
dealing with the laws of exchange and our custom of the
three days' grace on bills of exchange; but he did not
think that these difficulties ought to deter them. Where
difficulties arose he thought they Might be much simplified
by always consolidating up to the present, and having a
periodical republication of the statutes ; so that counsel
could take up the labour where his predecessor had left off.
The consolidation would in this way bo kept in such a
state as to effect, he thought, the object they all had in view.
Mr. L. KING had listened with great attention to the
speech of the hon. and learned member for Suffolk, whom
ho was glad to see coming forward as a law reformer. As
to the statute law commission he would ask what had it
done? In 1853 a good plan was framed by it; in
1854 all the men employed in working out that plan
had been detached from the commission ; and in 1855
the commission was left destitute and without a plan,
The plan laid down by the Lord Chancellor was, the pre-
paration of a list of statutes that had become obsolete, or
been repealed, and the introduction of a declaratory bill ;
but that list was never prepared, and the declaratory bill
which the Lord Chancellor promised in 1853 had not been
brought in to this day. He (Mr. L. King) felt confident
that this plan would have 'been a far better one than that
proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman for by the
system of consolidation now proposed the confusion already
existing in the statute-book would be increased rather than

diminished. If they adopted the plan which had been laid
by Lord Bacon, Lord Hardwick, and even the Lord Chan-
cellor himself, to expurgate and cleanse the statute•book
of those ten thousand and odd statutes, they would at once
clear away a great deal deal of lumber and open the road
to a salutary measure of law reform. He would only add,
that ho felt extremely grateful to the hon. and learned.
gentleman (Sir F. Kelly) for having brought this important
question before the house.

Mr. BAINES approved of the plan of Sir F. Kelly, fur
it was founded on the labours of the statute•law commis-
sion, where the drafts of those and other bills were now
lying. If they proceeded in supporting his learned friend
they would be fast arriving at the point of codification.
Mr. M`MA.HON was in favour of consolidation as the
only practical mode of proceeding.
Mr. NAPIER here intimated that if no satisfactoryplan
for carrying out the objects contemplated by the resolution
he had proposed on Tuesday night, and to which the house
then agreed, were introduced by the Goverement before
Easter, he should lose no time in again calling the atten-
tion of the house to the subject.

The SOLICITOR GENERAL would have been glad if
his right hon. friend before bringing on his motion theother
night had had the opportunity of reading the valuable
paper which had been submitted to the statute law com-
mission, and which he (the Solicitor General) thought he
would have recognised as embodying all he desired for the
accomplishment of his object, and even further objects
than those which were comprehended in his motion.
(Hear.) With regard to the question before the house, it
was necessary to discriminate somewhat between that
which was most properly in the motion of his hon. and
learned friend (Sir F. Kelly), and the great number of
theotrical and discursive subjects which had been referred
to in the course of the debate. (Hear.) In justice to his
hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General, he (the
Solicitor-General) rose only to explain in some degree bow
far they had differed from the commission, and what was
the real object they desired to achieve. They had bowed
with deference to the united opinions of the other corns
misiioners ; and the whole subject of difference between
them was simply this, as appeared from the papers before
the house—what was the mode in which they should select
the subjects to which the statutes referred that were now
propuied to be consolidated ? He must admit that he de-
sired the selection should be made according to some system
of aualyeis ; end be confessed that be did so in the hope
that it might lay the foundation for the future framework
of codifying the law, (Hear, hear.) The statute law com-
mission proposed to take a particular subject, to collect the
vat bolls statutes relating to that subject, and to embody
them in one. But the objection to this might be illus-
trated in the following manner :—Take the law relating to
real property, for instance. The statutes which referred
to that subject involved certain enactments, some of which
related to freeholds, some to leaseholds, some to copy-
holds, and others to partnership ; so that when they had
completed their consolidated statute, they would have
heaped together a tumulus of fragmentary parts of the
law, certainly ranging under one head—namely, that of
executors and administrators—but having no connection
with the subject. The proposition made, therefore, was,
that instead of this arrangement, the heads and titles
should be selected with reference to an analyitical division
of the law, and then all branches of the law would find
their appropriate places—the law relating to real pro-
perty would not be mixed up with personal property,
and the consolidation would proceed on a plan of philo-
sophical analysis. All that he desired, therefore, was,
that that analysis should be made the groundwork on which
the selection of subjects, or heads or titles of the consoli-
dated statutes, should stand. That, however, was not ac•
ceded to ; it was repudiated by the body of the commission
and, therefore, as his learned friend (the Attorney-Gene-
ral) and himself found theupelves in a minority, he was
bound to admit that they must have been in error, although
they were not at the time enabled to discover in what that
error consisted. (Hear, and a laugh.) He admitted, with
regard to the subject of codification, that there might be
some difficulty in expressing in written words the great
and extensive general principles of the common law ; but
the great principles of the common law and the principles
of equity were always to be found in some universal gene-
ral maxims of the law of morality, of good sense, or of na-
tural justice that would ever remain embodied in those
maxims. With this exception, then, he believed there was
no more difficulty in reducing the law of England to a code,
whether it was the written—that was the statute law—or
I whether it was that which was called the unwritten law,
collected out of the reports of cases and decisions—that
there was no snore difficulty in doing that than there was
in framing a book upon any given subject, pr than had been
experienced in regard to the laws of Rome. (Hear. What
was done with the laws of Rome might be done with the
laws of England now, and he thought there was no reason
to despair of the possibility of approaching a state of things
when these latter should present something like order, ar-
rangement, and analysis. (Rear.) He agreed that they
must commence the work by consolidating the statute
law ; and so thinking, he bailed and welcomed in the moat
c .rdial manner tho accession of his hon, and learned friend
(Sir F. Kelly), and must express the great pleasure and
delight with which he had heard the most sensible, tho
most seitesamulike, and, he would add, the most philoso-
nhical speech of the noble lord the member for King's
Lynn. (Hoar.
Sir F. KELLY, in reply, said, if it were practicable to
sweep away that vast portion of the statute law which had
become obsc late, as recommended by the Attorney Geuoral
he should be obliged to his hon. and learned friend if he
would perform the task for him, and so enable him with
the greater faoility to proceed with the bills he asked leave
to submit to the house. But his hon. and learned friend
had entirely forgotten that, in order to cleanse the statute
bock of these enactments, it would be necessary to go from