[2] In 1551, in his Discourse on the Reformation of Abuses, King Edward VI, then aged 14, wrote:[3][4][5] "I have showed my opinion heretofore of the statutes I think most necessary to be enacted this Session.
Nevertheless, I would wish that besides them and hereafter, when time shall serve, the superfluous and tedious statutes were brought into one sum together, and made more plain and short, to the intent that men might better understand them; which thing shall much help to advance the profit of the Commonwealth.
[5] "Althoughe there remayne and stande in force pntly a greate nomber of Actes and Statutes concerning the reteyning departing wages and orders of Apprentices Servantes and Labourers, as well in Husbandrye as in divers other Artes Misteries and occupacons, yet ptly for thimperfeccon and contrarietie that ys founde and doo appeare in sundrye of the sayde Lawes, and for the varyetie and nomber of them, and chiefly for that the wages and allouances lymytted and rated in many of the sayd Statutes, are in dyvers places to small and not answerable to this tyme, respecting thadvancement of Pryses of all things belonging to the sayd Servantes and Labourers, the said Lawes cannot conveniently without the greate greefe and burden of the poore Labourer and hired man, bee put in good and due execution : And as the sayd severall Actes and Statutes were at the time of the making of them thought to be very good and beneficiall for the Comon wealthe of this Realms as dyvers of them yet are, So yf the substance of as many of the said Lawes as are meet to bee continued shalbe digested and reduced into one sole Lawe and Statute, & in the same an uniforme Order prescrybed and lymitted concerning the Wages and other Orders for Apprentises Servauntes and Laborers, there ys good hope that yt will come to passe that the same Lawe, beyng duly executed, should banishe Idlenes advance Husbandrye and yeelde unto the hired pson bothe in the tyme of scarsitee and in the tyme of plentye a convenient proporcon of Wages.
"Bacon named twenty committees, each consisting of four members (one judge and three counsel) with an assigned title or division of the statute law.
And this reformation might (me thinkes) bee made a worthy worke, and well deserves a Parliament to be set of purpose for it"In 1610, the House of Commons, with permission of the House of Lords on 23 July 1610, petitioned the crown to appoint a commission to "make a diligent Survey of all the Penal Statutes of this Realm, to the End that such as are obsolete or unprofitable may be repealed; and that, for the better Ease and Certainty of the Subject, all such as are profitable, concerning One Matter, may be reduced into One Statute, to be passed in Parliament.
"[13][9] In 1616, Sir Francis Bacon, then Attorney General, submitted to King James I a proposal "touching the compiling and amendment of the laws of England".
6. c.11), recommended the appointment of commissioners to examine and establish ecclesiastical laws, named by both houses of parliament, to prepare bills for the purpose of consolidation.
[9] The commission most likely published a list based on this work by Sir Francis Bacon, held in the British Museum, of the statutes from 3 Edw.
[9][5] Lord Bacon's fall from grace in 1621, as well as other more immediate priorities on the parliamentary agenda, meant that his attempts at the revision of the statute law were not pursued.
[9] During the Commonwealth, in 1650 a committee was appointed, "to revise all former statutes and ordinances now in force and consider, as well, which are fit to be continued, altered or repealed, as how the same may be reduced into a compendious way and exact method for the more base and clear understanding of the people.
[16] On 19 December 1653, a second committee was appointed to consider a new model or body of the law, consisting of Colonel Edmund West, Praise-God Barebone, Sir Charles Wolseley, 2nd Baronet, William Spence, Nathaniel Taylor, Arthur Squib, Samuel Highland, William Kenrick, Colonel Thomas Blunt, Sir Gilbert Pickering, 3rd Baronet, Augustine Wingfield, Samuel Moyer and Major General Thomas Harrison, with a quorum of five and the power to send for "papers, persons and records".
"[9] The committee consisted of the Solicitor General, Heneage Finch, Serjeant John Maynard, Sir Robert Atkins, William Prynne and others.
The committee reported on 5 December 1796, making recommendations for the increased printing and distribution of public acts and for the improved drafting of temporary law.
[22] In 1806, the Commission on Public Records passed a resolution requesting the production of a report on the best mode of reducing the volume of the statute book.
[5] In 1816, both Houses of Parliament, passed resolutions that an eminent lawyer with 20 clerks be commissioned to make a digest of the statutes, which was declared "very expedient to be done."
[5] Two major Bills based on the work of the Commission covering offences against the person and larceny were introduced in 1853 and continued under Lord Cranworth.
The bills made no progress, principally because of the unanimously unfavourable judicial reaction to the prospect of the common law being embodied in statutory form.
The great number is of itself a circumstance that affords an irresistible argument for the necessity of doing something, but independently of their enormous quantity, there are other reasons which suggest themselves.
[5] The Board issued three reports dated 18 August 1853, 31 January 1854 and 2 June 1854, recommending the creation of a permanent body for statute law reform.
The debate ultimately rejected a motion moved by Peter Locke King MP to establish an alternative approach through a select committee.
[27] Following the Commission's second report, which recommended the appointment of an officer or board to revise and improve current legislation, the House of Commons resolved on 25 April 1856, requesting a "Copy of the Memorandum of the Attorney-general as to the plan of proceeding in Consolidation of the Statutes".
[28] Attorney General, Alexander Cockburn, proposed a plan of proceeding for the consolidation of the statutes, remarking that:[29] "In order to form a correct judgment as to the course of proceeding which it is expedient to adopt in the Consolidation of the Statutes, it is, in the first place, necessary to have a clear view of what is the true nature and extent of the work which the Commission is called upon to execute.
Partly written, partly unwritten, that part of our law which is unwritten, is to be gathered from the decision sand dicta of judges, dispersed over many hundreds of volumes of reports, or from the opinions of text writers, of various degrees of authority, contained in innumerable works; while the written law is scattered over thousands of statutes, strung together without any attempt at order or arrangement, and forming no less than forty ponderous volumes; the whole body of the law thus consisting a chaotic mass, to which the 'many camel-loads' of jurisprudence, of which the Roman jurists complained, hardly afford a parallel.
In April 1859, the Attorney General, Sir Fitzroy Kelly, introduced a series of bills to consolidate the criminal law, which had been prepared by the Commission.
"Pursuant to an order of the House of Lords dated 5 July 1859, the Register of Public General Acts, which had been prepared by the Commission and consisted of two volumes from 1800 to the end of 1858, was published.
To demonstrate the feasibility of consolidation, Cranworth introduced five sample Bills:[32] By 1859, efforts of statute law revision faced wide criticism from politicians, legal academics and commentators, who focused on the high expenditure to date by various Commissions and Boards (£768,438 since 1830—1859), especially on the salary and motivations of the Commissioners and draftsmen, including Charles Henry Bellenden Ker, the proposed approach taken by the Board to proceed with consolidation before expurgation, and the lack of results to show for it.
Wood to expurgate the statute book of all acts which, though not expressly repealed, were not in force, working backwards from the present time.
They said that they intended to adopt a more forceful approach by also repealing enactments which no longer served a substantial purpose, and that they hoped that this would also facilitate consolidation.