Question 484.— Should a private banking firm, whose business is confined strictly to private banking, register a certificate of the co-partnership, under cap. 152, E. S. 0.?

Answer.—The answer to this question depends upon whether a private banking firm is " a partnership for trading purposes" within the meaning of the statute. The statute is a remedial one, and both by the rules of construction adopted by the court and by the express provisions of the Interpretation Act, it should receive " such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as will best ensure the attainment of the object of the Act." The object of the Act is, of course, to inform persons dealing with partnerships of the names of the partners, and the changes in or dissolution of the firm. It is confined to "partnerships for trading, manufacturing or mining purposes." There are doubtless good reasons why it did not include partnerships of every kind, and no doubt in ascertaining what is a partnership for the purposes mentioned in the Act, the fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation referred to must be applied.

In an English case in which the question of what was an occupation of a house for the purpose of trading came up, the court used these words:—

" Undoubtedly, if we are to take the term ' for the purposes of trade' as relating only to the business of buying and selling, no one can say that there is any buying or selling in carrying on the business of a telegraph company. It was never the intention of the legislature so to limit the meaning of the word 'trade.' It is only the literal meaning of the word which is to be regarded. In literature of all descriptions, both in prose and verse, we find that the word ' trade' is often used in a much more extensive signification than to indicate merely the operations or occupation of buying and selling."

In illustrating their meaning the court further adds, "A banker's is a shop . . . and there again there is nothing like buying and selling as generally understood, but if it is a trade or business of a description quite sui generis."

In this case the court held that the business of a telegraph company was " for purposes of trade," within the meaning of the Act and we think that the court here would hold that a private banking partnership is a partnership for trading purposes within the meaning of our Act, and therefore the frrm should register the partnership declaration required by the Act.