The Sun.
London, England, 1857-01-31 00:00:00

Need we refer to the aLernations that have sinca
occurred? Are they not fixed in every maw's mind

who has been in any de;ree concerned in trade or
manufactures. These alternations must have
arisen from the operatim of the statute, and Mr.
COBDEN, who declarec that fluctuations in the
currency occasioned greater evils—pecuniary,
social, and moral, than the direct failures of all
the Banks of issue since they were first esta-
blished in the count'," should be th4first to
condemn that which produced such serious and
irreparable mischief.

" Sniffing the corn eg contest," Mercator, alias
Lard OVBRSTONE, and his flunkeys have started
into a mischievous activity. Like the hackneyed
Counsel in PEEBLES V. PLANESTANES, their sole
object is to confuse and mystify the subject
already sufficiently obscure, and by their unmean-
ing jargon and reckless assertions as to the
beneficial !results of the Act (!) to prevent the
nation from insisting on a circulating medium
adequate to its warts and exigencies. What were
these beneficial resilts ? At first speculation was
stimulated to the utmost pitch. The Bank,
bound to purchase all the gold tendered
at a fixed pri::e, was compelled to offer
its notes at any rate of discount that
could be obtained. It supplied rich food to
the fever-stricken patient, as it subsequently
starved the famishing wretch, who required judi-
cious treatment. It first produced the "mania"
and then the "panic ;" and even within the last
few months led to a minimum, rate of discount
at the quasi National Establishment, of 7 per
cent., equivalent to 10 or 12 per cent, to the
merchants aid manufacturers who had not dis-
count accounts opened at the Bank of England.
Is it not an uncuestionable fact that on the very
first emergency it produced a state of embarrass-
ment and difficulty never exceeded, or, as Mr.
GURNEY declared, "beyond all parallel in our
monetary history ?" Why, then, should we re-
tain so mischievous a law ? We can make allow-
ance for the perverse obstinacy with which Mer-
eator defends the pet theory of which he is the
putative parent, and with which his political
reputation as well as his pecuniary interests are
so closely mixed up. But we really cannot ima-
gine any disinterested and unprejudiced person
being now hoodwinked by such palpable fallacies
as he and bis adulators have combined to bring
forward.

Mr. G. ARBUTHNOT has just published a
verbose phamphlet,* of which it is difficult to
understand the meaning, save that it is intended,
as he tells us, "to confirm the principles on
which the Act of 1844 is founded." This gentle-
man, however, cannot be considered a fair or im-
partial witness. As he tells us in the preliminary
epistle, addressed to his " Dear Sir CHARLES
Wool)," that he was private secretary to that un-
fortunate and most incompetent financier in 1847,
and also " under Sir R. PEEL in the same capa-
city for several years, including that of 1844."
He therefore comes heralded by his antecedents,
fcenurm habet in comic. He is dangerous, distilling
at second hand the fallacies of Sir CHARLES WOOD,
and those which Sir ROBERT PEEL would in all
human probability now repudiate, were he living.
As we have stated, his efforts are merely to -con-
fuse and mystify ; and that he succeeds in doing,
as any one who takes the trouble of wading
through 110 pages of unmitigated trash will be
compelled to confess when he rises from its
perusal. We are not afraid that Mr. G. AR-
OUT/SNOT will do much to advance the cause in
which he has wasted so much ink and spoiled so
many goodly sheets of paper.

It is impossible to doubt that very beneficial
results must attend the Mercantile Law Confer-
ence, whlel is even now being held at WrLus's
Rooms. The representatives from 21 leading
cities and towns, containing no less than five
millions of inhabitants, all deeply interested in
the trade and commerce of the country, may au-
thoritatively recommend ameliorations in the
commercial code, and due weight must be given
to their suggestions. Parliament could not ignore
the proceedings of a body of gentlemen so pre-
eminently qualified for the task they have under-
taken. The progress of legal reform, although
much has unquestionably been effected of late
years, has been very tardy. It has invariably
taken a long time to bring the seed to maturity.

There are many adverse elements to be conci-
liated or overcome. Men look rather to their per-
sonal and private interests than to the good of the
community. They are peculiarly sharp in
discovering blemishes in matters affecting, or that
may possibly affect, their own pockets. Any
cheap and summary remedies that may diminish
the cost and amount of litigation are particularly
obnoxious to a very influential class, some
whereof have access to at least one or more members
of either House of Parliament. Noble Lords will
listen to hints from their family solicitors ; Ron.
Gentlemen have additional reasons to pay atten-
tion to the applications of those who managed
their elections, and contributed largely to place
them in the positions they uow occupy. Thus
their costs flourish ; for it has truly been said,
" England is an attorney-ridden nation."
But, notwithstanding the obstructions and
difficulties that impede the path—truth still pre-
vails and vast improvements are effected, albeit
with considerable difficulty and delay. The Law
Amendment Society has generally either completely
succeeded, or at least materially advanced, the
matters which it has taken in hand. It is, there-
fore, with peculiar pleasure that we witness the
present Conference inaugurated under its au-
spices, thus insuring the cordial co-operation of its
learned and indefatigable members in the
important objects to be achieved. These
objects are numerous and important. The
recent conflicts of jurisdiction between an
official manager and an official assignee, lead-
ing to heavy expense and delay, the vexatious
litigation occasioned by individual creditors seek-
ing in some instances to obtain undue advantages
for themselves, in which the general body cannot
participate, in others merely to multiply costs,
heedless of the ruin they bring on innocent
parties, and of the injury that must result to
others whose claims are as well founded as their
own, prove beyond the possibility of doubt that
extensive alterations in the law of Joint-stock
Partnerships and the Winding-up Acts are im-
peratively required. The case of KINGSFORD
V. MERRY, where palpable wrong was inflicted on
a perfectly innocent party, and discredit cast upon
a class of securities that has been largely resorted
to by mercantilelmen, shows a defect in the law that
requires an immediate remedy. The whole law
of debtor and creditor must be revised. The law
of bankruptcy materially amended, and that
of insolvency assimilated to, or rather consoli-
dated therewith, under these heads will come the
peculiarly interesting question of imprisonment for
debt, which should be resorted toonlyas a punishment
for fraud, or a recklessness of conduct that virtually
amounts to fraud—and inflicted under the sen-
tence of a competent tribunal, in place of being
left to the discretion of individual creditors—who
are too frequently actuated by vindictive feelings,

* Sir Robert Peel's Act of 1844, Regulating the Issue of
Bank Notes, Vindicated. By G. Arbuthnot. Longmani
and Co. Pp. 110.