The meetings of the American Bar Association held in London in 1957 furnished an incidental but valuable opportunity to inquire into the methods of English legislative draftsmanship and to make some useful comparisons with its counterpart in Washington.

The first striking fact that emerges in such a comparison is that almost all the public laws enacted by Parliament are drafted by one small group of men, the expert draftsmen of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. This is in sharp contrast to the situation in Washington, where legislation is prepared by the Offices of the Legislative Counsel of the House and Senate, by members of the professional staffs of the many standing and special committees of Congress, by the legal staffs of the executive departments and agencies, and even by members of the public. Since this aggregate is very large, the question immediately arises: Why so few and so concentrated in London and why so many and so dispersed in Washington?

One obvious explanation would seem to be that the greater size and complexity of the United States must inevitably result in a larger number of, and more difficult, legislative problems, too large for any single drafting group to handle. But even a cursory examination of the recent statute books shows a physical volume of English public laws quite comparable to that appearing during the same period in the Federal Statutes at Large.