Partnership

For the later history of the Parthian empire reference should be made to PERSIA : Ancient History, and biographical articles on the kings. The following is a list of the kings, as far as it is possible to establish their succession. The names of pretenders not generally acknowledged are put in brackets:— books. It was mostly the result of judge-made law, and as dis tinguished from the law of joint stock companies was affected by comparatively few Acts of parliament.

In

I890 the Partnership Act of that year was passed to declare and amend the law of partnership; the Act came into operation on Jan. I, 1891. With one important exception (s. 23), it applies to the whole United Kingdom. It is not a complete code of part nership law ; it contains no provisions regulating the administration of partnership assets in the event of death or bankruptcy, and is silent on the subject of goodwill. The existing rules of equity and common law continue in force, except so far as they are incon sistent with the express provisions of the Act. Indeed, the Act of 1890 has to be read in the light of the decisions which have built up these rules.

Nature of Partnership.

Partnership is defined to be the "relation which subsists between persons carrying on a business in common with a view of profit." Co-ownership of property does not of itself create a partnership, nor does the sharing of gross returns. The sharing of profits, though not of itself sufficient to create a partnership, is prima facie evidence of one. To illustrate the rule that persons may share profits without being partners, the Act gives statutory expression to the decision in Cox v. Hickman (I86o, 8 H.L.C., 268), viz., that the receipt by a person of a debt or other fixed sum by instalments, or otherwise, out of the accruing profits of a business does not of itself make him a partner ; and it re-enacts with some slight modification the repealed provisions of Bovill's Act (28 and 29 Vict. C. 86), which was passed to remove certain difficulties arising from the decision in Cox v. Hickman. Partners are called collectively a "firm"; the name under which they carry on business is called the firm name. Under English law the firm is not a corporation, nor is it recog nized as distinct from the members composing it ; any change amongst them destroys the identity of the firm. In Scotland a

firm is a legal person distinct from its members, but each partner can be compelled to pay its debt.

At common law there is no limit to the number of partners, but by the Companies Act 1862 (25 and 26 Vict. c. 89, s. 4), not more than ten persons can carry on the business of bankers, and not more than 20 any other business, unless (with some excep tions) they conform to the provisions of the Act. (See COMPANY, and also Limited Partnerships below.) Relations of Partners to Persons Dealing with Them.— Every partner is an agent of the firm and of his co-partners for the purpose of the partnership business ; if a partner does an act for carrying on the partnership business in the usual way in which businesses of a like kind are carried on he thereby prima facie binds his firm. The partners may by agreement between themselves restrict the power of any of their number to bind the firm. If there be such an agreement, no act done in contravention of it is binding on the firm with respect to persons who have notice of the agreement. Such an agreement does not affect persons who have no notice of it, unless indeed they do not know or believe the person with whom they are dealing to be a partner; in that case he has neither real, nor, so far as they are concerned, apparent authority to bind his firm, and his firm will not be bound.

A firm is liable for loss or injury caused to any person not a partner, or for any penalty incurred by any wrongful act or omis sion of a partner acting in the ordinary course of the partnership business, or with the authority of his co-partners ; the extent of the firm's liability is the same as that of the individual partner. The firm is also liable to make good the loss (a) where one part ner, acting within his apparent authority, receives money or property of a third person and misapplies it ; and (b) where a firm in the course of its business receives money or property of a third person, and such money or property while in the custody of the firm is misapplied by a partner. To fix the other partners with liability, notice of the breach of trust must be brought home to them individually.