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

his hon. and learned friend had proposed would never
finish. That was his view of the subject.. Ho would not
say that he stood alone in entertaining it, fir he had the
great advantage of having in it the concurrence of his hon.
and learned friend the Solicitor-General ; but, unfortu-
nately, they were in the minority as regarded the statute
law commission, and be therefore did not vindicate that
practical scheme as ono that that .commission had any
regard for. He was. however, very glad that an hon.
gentleman with such tranecendant 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 introducLion of the bill, he would have
great satisfaction in seeing the hon. and learned member
receiving any tvsistance which her Majesty's Government
or any hon. member of that house could afford him iu the
good work. Although ho did not think that the thing was
done in the best' manner, he. could assure his hon. and
learned friend that he 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 conctirred in wha.t 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 for 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 he thought he might congratulate the
country on the ability, the perseverance, and the energy
which had induced the hon. and learned member fer Suf-
folk to pledge himself to the House of Commons to carry
out, with the concurrene3 of Parliament, the task he had
undertaken. Consolidation was in his opinion perfectly
practicable, for it introduced nothing new and therefore
raised 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 one 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 en 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, be
consequence of what had fallen from his learned friend the
Attorney-General. He would take another opportunity of
noticing the general reuiarks of his hon. and learned friend;
but as to the question before tho how%' and what the At-
torney-General has said in reference to his introduction of
the measures, be (Sir F. Kelly) begged to state distinctly
that he was not the organ of the statute law commission.
(Hear.) He appeared there to propose these measures
merely as an individeal—as *an independent member of
Parliament. (Hear, and cheers) It was quite true that for
the last few weeks he had been a merdber 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 whore he had communi-
cated to say that be 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
and 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. memberi 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 mom-
bert, who were more competent to form an opinion on
the subject thaneheessas, he was of opinion that they would
the more speedily and'effeetually arrive at a codification
of the statute letvs by consolidating them, subject by sub-
ject, than by attempting by one measure a complete codis
rication of the statute law. (Hear, hear.) He thought
that the hon. and leestated gentleman opposite had some-
what underrated scone of the difficulties in the way 'of
consolidation. For instance, that which would arise in
dealing with the, lawiof 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 tbe statutes ; so that conasel
could take up the labour where his predecessor had left'off.
The consolidation Would in this way be kept in suesh a
state as to effect, he thought, the object they all hul in view.
Mr. L. KING had listenei,l With great attention to the
speech of the hon. and learned member for Suffolk, whom
ho was glad to see coining forward as a law reformer. As
to the statute law counnissioh he would ask what had it
done? In 1853 a egeOd ' 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 Lora chancel., was, the pre-
paration of a list of statute:3 that 'had become obsolete, or
been repealed, and the introduction of a declaratory bill ;
bat that list was nesser prepared, and the declaratory bill
which the Lord Chaecellor promised in 1853 had not been
brought in to this day. He (Hr. L. King) felt confident
that this plan would have been a far better ono than that
proposed by the hon. anti learned gentleman for by the
system of consolidation now proposed the confusion already
existing in the stetate-book would be increased rather than
diminished. If they adopted the plan which hail 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 wonid at once
clear away a groat deal deal of lure bar and open the road
to a salutary measure of law reform. Ho would only add,
that he felt extremely greteful 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, for
it was founded on the labours of the statute-law commis-
sion, where the drafts of those and other bills wore noir
lying. If they proceeded in' supporting his learned frasnd
they would be fast arriving at the point ef codification.
Mr. M‘MAHON was in- favour of consolidation as the
only practical mode of proceeding
Mr. NAPIER he 'e iotithated that if no satisfactory plan
for carrying out the objects contemplated by the resolution
he had proposed on Tuesdaynight, 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.
Tho SOLICITOR. GENERAL would have been glad if
his right hon. friend before bringing on hie motion the other
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 1 o
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 Lad 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)ssose only to'explain in some degree how
far they had differeifTronesthe commission, and what was
the real object they desired to achieve. They had bowed
with deference to the United cipieions of the other com-
missioners; 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
thestatutes referred that were now
proposed to be consolidated ? He must admit that hede-
sired the selection should be made according to some system
of analysis ; and he confesied that he did so in the hope
that it might lay the-foundatiou for the future framework
of codifying the law. (Hear, bear.) The statute law com-
mission proposed to take a• particular subject, to collect the
'various statutes relating to that subject, and to embody
them in one. But the- objection to this might be illus;
trated in the following matiner :—Take the law relating to
real property, for instance. The statutes which referred
to that subject involved certain enactments, some of which
s'elated 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 wider one herd—Lamely, that of
executors and administrators—but having no connection
with the subject. The pioposition made, therefore, was,
that instead of this arrangement, the heath and titles
should beseleeted with reference to an analyitical division
of the law, and then ell branches (f the law would find
their appropriate places—the law relating to real pro-
perty would not be mixed up with personal proert
and the consolidation wool! proceed on a plan of philo-
sophical analysis. All that he desired, therefore, war,
that that analysis should bs made the grouudwork 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 them=elves 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 inexinss of the law ef'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
whether it was that which was called the unwritten law,
collected oat 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, or 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 heethought 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. (Hear.) He agreed that they
must commence- the writ by consolidating the statute
law ; and so thinking: he .hailed and welcomed in the most
c nelial manner the accession of his hon. and learned friend
(Sir F. Kelly), and must express the great pleasure and
delight with which be had heard the most sensible, the
most stetesmauliko, cud, ha would edd, the most philoso-
phical speech of the noble lord the member for King's
Lynn. (Hear.
Sir F. KELLY,. in; reply, said,.if.jt were practicable to
sweep away'that vast portion Of the statute law whichhad
become obsolete, as reconanaeuded by the Attorney General
he should lee obliged to his hon. and learned friend if be
would perform the task fm- hire, and so enable-him with
the greater facility to prodeed with the bills he asked leave
to submit to the house. But his hon, andleerned friend

bad entirely forgotten that, in order to Cleanse the statute
book of then eluKtinento, it world be inceonry to go fruz