On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    July 1, 1854.] THE LEADER. 605

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Parliament Of The Week. Lord Aberdeen Is...

    lightened England . In no civilised country in the world did the like bigotry prevail . Further proceedings were brought summarily to a close by an intimation from the Speaker that a clause could not be proposed on the third reading without notice . Mr . Hey wood had given notice of a clause , but the one substituted was so great a deviation from it , that it could not be proceeded with if any one member objected . On the suggestion of Lord John Russell-, it was agreed that the discussion should be resumed on Thursday . Mr . Heywood stated that he would give due notice of his clause . The only change would be to include bachelors of " music "

    On the order for further proceeding on the third reading of this bill , Mr . Heywood moved his clause for making it unnecessary , after the 1 st day of next Michaelmas term , for any person , upon taking the degree of bachelor in arts , law , medicine , or music , in the University , to make or subscribe any declaration or take any oath except the oath of allegiance . Mr . Evelyn Denison seconded the motion . Mr . Henley opposed it , on the grounds that , though alleged to be moderate , it was avowedly a step towards future innovations , and because it would make religious teaching in the University impossible . He moved that the clause be read a

    second time that day six months . Mr . Newdegate supported the amendment . The Chancellor of the Exchequer said it was his intention , and that of Lord J . Rosseix , to support the clause , believing that , after the unniistakeable decision of the House , lie was thereby doing the best for the University . He was convinced that the University would address herself in an earnest spirit to the requirements of the Legislature ; but he could find nothing in the clause to prevent the University from administering , as before , a religious-education to the children of members of the Church of England .

    Mr . Serjeant Shee , whilst complaining-, amid the impatience of the House , that the oath of allegiance should be imposed , supported the clause , which , upon a division , was carried by 233 against 79 . Mr . John Phillibiore moved a clause to the effect that no member of the University should , after the 1 st of December next , be allowed , on account of his rank , to pass his examination or take his degree sooner than any other undergraduate . Lord John Russell assented to the clause , and it was agreed to . ' . . ' An addition to clause 18 of the words , " heads of colleges and halls , being professors , shall vote only for heads of colleges or halls , " moved by Mr . E . Denison , was agreed to .

    The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved to add to Mr . lloundell Palmer ' s Qthe school ) clause , words excluding from its operation fellowships and studentships . The motion was warmly debated , and , upon a division , was negatived by 139 to 129 . The bill then passed , witU a new title . LAW OP PARTNERSHIP . The House of Commons discussed the question of limited liability on Tuesday , and arrived at a decision feebly opposed by the Government . The debate brought forth no novelty in the way of argument ; but it is of interest as marking the position of the question . In bringing the subject before the House , Mr . Collier observed that it was not a mere lawyer's question , but one on which the co-operation of all classes of members would be advantageous . He briefly stated the character of the law as it exists , and by which it is presumed that every partner has a right to bind all the others to an umlimited extent . The assurance companies , ho remarked , alone evaded the law ; but all our greatest worksincluding our

    , railways and the Crystal Palace , aroso from its violation . He said that our doctrine was at variance with the civil la w , and that it rested only upon a questionable decision sixty years ago . Explaining the principle of partnership en commandite , by which registered partners were unliinitedly liable , while others wore liable only to the amount of their subscription , he adverted to its acceptance and , beneficial working in Florence , Genoa , Venice , France , Holland , Germany , Russia , and America . He addressed himself at some length to a refutation of various objections to the system of limited liability , which ho contended was in conformity with tho principles of political economy , and rcBted upon tho same basis us tree trade in other things than capital . Ho moved thia resolution : —

    " Tlmttlio law of pnrtnai'dliip , which rondors every porson who , though not an ostoiiuiblo purtnor , bIuu-oh t ho prutita of a trading concern , liable to tho whole ot ita d « jl > t « , is unmitiafuctory , ami should bo so far modified ns to pennit poisons to contribute to tho oapitul of huc-Ii concerns on terms of snaring thoir profits , without incurring liability beyond a limited amount . " Lord Qodisuioh seconded tho motion , and contended that all our great -works wore carried on for tho benefit of tho wealthy classes , tho uuniblor capitalist having no means of advantageously investing his gains . Ho thought that groat uocial benefits would bo derived from the propoaed change . Tho

    House must see that such a change would tend to remove the obstacles that now exist to the practical exemplification of that unity of interests which ought to bind together all classes of producers . It -would be unwise on all grounds—social , political , and economical—for the House to maintain those restrictions , unless it was shown that there were great and overwhelming grounds of public necessity why those restrictions should be maintained . It had been said by Mr . W . Brown , on a former debate , that the commercial credit of this country in the markets of the world was greater than that of Prance , because they had a law of unlimited liability in this country , and a law of limited liability in Trance , but the honourable member must have

    overlooked many otlier important differences that exist between this country and France—differences which must much more strongly affect the' commercial interests of a country . He should remember that during the space of seventy years there had been six revolutions in France , and the same security for property could not exist in a country so liable to political changes as in a country like this . He trusted that her Majesty's Government would accede to this resolution , or that , at least , the President of the Board of Trade -would state that he had not yet irrevocably made up his mind on this question , but that he was prepared to give due weight to the great authorities who had written and spoken in favour of limited liability .

    Mr . Cardwell said that he was willing fully to consider all the arguments on the subject . When such investigation should have taken place , he was sure that no objection would be made to the alteration of the law on the free-trade principle , but the question would be , what was the mode by which competition could best be promoted , the position of industrious men improved , and the objects of ingenious and scientific men advanced . He could not ,, however , say that the report of the commission on the subject , which had only been in his hands for a week , had as yet received the attention that was due

    to so important a topic . He cautioned the House against coming to an irrevocable decision before the whole of the information was before them , and he stated some of the difficulties in the way of the question , and' the conflicting opinions of the commissioners upon it , remarking that the opinion of the minority as well as that of the majority should be respected . He abstained from . arguing the question on either side , because he desired to dissuade the House from coming to a conclusion . They would carry the confidence of the community with them by not legislating except upon matured consideration .

    Mr . Lucas urged the special case of the condition of Ireland , and moved the addition of words to the effect that the modification of the partnership law was especially necessary in that country . Mr . Cobden supported the motion , and contended that the law performed , under the present system , the supererogatory duty of taking care of those who were perfectly capable of taking care of themselves . All difficulty might be obviated by a system of registration . He observed that the evidence recently presented appeared to have been obtained from one class only , that of the capitalist , and that it was to a certain extent class-evidence , and not an expression of the opinion of the humbler orders of men of business , who would be greatly benefited by a change in the law .

    Mr . Malins predicted , from tho present state of opinion on the subject , that the anomalous condition of the law would soon be remedied by legislation in the spirit of the proposed resolution . He regretted to gather from Mr . Cardwell's tone that ho vas opposed to an alteration of the law , and ho bore professional testimony to tho great mischiefs it occasioned , Mr . Glyn admitted that tho commercial law of the country was in a most anomalous state , but tho evidence which had been taken did not satisfy him that the House had information enoueh before them

    to justify them in making the proposed change . Ilo observed that tho provisions -which all- tho foreign witnesses had concurred in saying must be taken against fraud , if the change were made , would render tho now system so odious as to defeat its object . Ho also urged that the change would necessitate an immense ditfbreneo in our system of commercial transactions , and ho thought that tho discussion should bo entered upon with tho fullest knowledge , but he added that ho advanced these considerations in no desire to delay a measures which would bo a decided improvement in commercial legislation .

    Mr . J . G . I ' liiM . iMOiuii ridiculed tho idea that tho House had not sullicicnt information upon a Bubjcut which had been under discussion bo many yeurs . It waa most important , ho said , to show tho lowor classes that wo were moat humous to legislate for thoir benefit . In answer to Mr . Qlyn , he said that it was not tho contemplated socidtd «« cummanditc , but tho Hocitltd anonym ? ., that required tho penal legislation alluded to . Mr . Lkvkbon Gqwbk , in am eilcctivo maiden speouh , supported tho resolution , expressed his opinion that tho present ago tended to association , th « power of which waa only beginning

    to be appeciated , and insisted upon the advantage of extending the benefits of association to honest and prudent men instead of to gamblers . Mr . Digby Seymoub argued that the speech of Mr . Cardwell , and the proposed abolition of the usury laws , indicated steps in advance on the part of the Government . He supported the resolution . Mr . W . Brown said he considered that limited liability would be injurious to the credit of the country and to the interests of the lower classes . Mr . Sotheron thought that harm rather than good was done by the affirming abstract propositions , and being himself favourable to the object of the mover of the resolution , he suggested that , instead of the resolution itself , a bill should be introduced authorising loans for business purposes , on the principle of the French law of partnership en commandite .

    The Attorney-General said that he was a decided friend to the proposition , but he remarked that this question was now brought under the notice of the House for the first time , and that evidence was before them which they had not had time to consider . He also saw no advantage hi carrying an abstract proposition , and he recommended Mr . Collier to be satisfied with the attention the subject had received , and with the assurance that it should be fully considered by Government . Mr . Napier concurred in this suggestion , and thought it was sufficient that the question had been ventilated .

    Lord Palmer ston also thought that the resolution should not be pressed to a division . No one could deny the importance of the question , or that there were opinions gravely entertained on both sides , and it could not be expected that Government should rush to a decision , or should declare , "without more time for consideration , which opinion they might ultimately feel it right to submit to the House . Mr . Kicardo had never seen the House so unanimous , and could not understand why such unanimity should not be placed on record . He contrasted the frank statement of the Attorney-General , with the evasive speech of Mr . Cardwell , and said that as for alleging that a study of the report was necessary for a right understanding of the question , he had read twenty pamphlets , any one of which -vras worth a dozen of" such reports . Mr . Cairns also urged that

    a division should be taken , in order to mark the point to which the House had come . Mr . Horsfall . deprecated a division , and said that if it were taken he , having had no time to study the evidence , should oppose the motion , not upon the merits , but as objecting to pledge the House to an abstract resolution . Mr . Hamkjey regretted the appeal which had been made by the Government to Mr . Collier . Mr . Collier thought it was almost immaterial , after the strong opinions that had been expressed , whether he divided or not , and feeling the force of the appeal that had been made to him , he desired to withdraw the motion . ( " Oh , oh ! " "Divide !'") Mr . Mac-GREGOit deprecated a division . But the House , especially the Opposition members , had made up their minds , and Mr . Lucas ' s amendment was added to the original resolution , and the latter having been put , was agreed to without division .

    HAMPSTEAD HEATH ENCLOSURE . Sir Thomas Maryon Wilson has promoted a bill to effect tho enclosure of Hampstead Heath . The Marquis of Clakricardb , who has tlie matter in hand , moved the second reading on Tuesday night , and carried it . The bill is called the Finchley Road Bill ; and the marquis contends that it is not the same as the bills previously rejected , but relates solely to a road running under the hill and not seen

    from tho heath . It was precisely similar to other measures passed every session through Parliament . Lord Brougham moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months . " Those , " ho suid , " who uro going to oppose this bill for the sixth time are not going to take away property from the petitioner ; the y only object to his taking that which is not his own—to his encroaching upon other people ' s rights , and endeavouring to defeat tho will under wlnoh . ho liolds hia property . "

    Karl Manvers also opposed tho bill , but it was supported by Lord Colcuesthr , Lord Campbell said that his opinion remained unaltered . It wa 3 the same opinion as was held by Lord Penman and Lord Tontcrdcn , that it was contrary to tho principles of jurisprudence that such a bill should pans . Lord Clanricardo said the law was all on the sido of tho promoter . Then , why did ho come to Parliament ? The truth was , the law was all against him , and he was obliged to come and ask Parliament to

    set aside tho will of the testator , not <> u tho ground of invalidity , but because it was distasteful to him that he had not more powur than tho will gave him . In this cuso the testator gave oxpross power to tho tenant for life to make long leases in some of hia estates , but cautiously and designedly , from motives probably of patriotism and benevolence , withheld them with regard to the estates in Middlesex . Lord St . Lkonaum ' w and Lord Diaunv supported tho bill . It is not correct to say that tho bill is contrary to tho jurisprudence of tho country , which allows tivtiry man who iB a tenant for life to apply

    July 1, 1854.] The Leader. 605

    July 1 , 1854 . ] THE LEADER . 605

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), July 1, 1854, page 5, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_01071854/page/5/