The Evening Star. WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, The Morning News, and The Echo. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1880.

Auckland Star, Volume XI, Issue 3218, 12 November 1880, Page 2

The Evening Star. WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, The Morning News, and The Echo.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1880.

For the cause that lacks assistance. For the wrong that needs resistance. For the future in the distance, And the good that we can do.

The cable news from Europe to-day gives greater promise of a peaceful cession of Dulcigno to Montenegro, but simultaneously a war-note is sounded by Greece. Piecemeal the Porte may be induced, under strong pressure, to conform to the Berlin proposition ; but it is quite evident, that when giving its consent to the basis of settlement fixed by the representatives of the Great Powers, Turkey had no more intention of carrying out its parfc of the bargain than it had in 1856 of seriously tackling the work of internal reform which was the only return England ever aßked for the losses of tbe Crimea. No doubt the Sultan and his advisers see in the rising nationalties on the borders of the Ottoman Empire the instruments by which the final destruction of Turkish rule in Europe will be accom-

plished, and tho impulse of self-preserva-tion prompts a dogged resistance to the progress of events, though tho national fatalism and tho incapaoity and Mus-' sulman bigotry of tho rulers prevent any resolute and systematic attempt to grapple -with the evils that have sapped tho foundations of the Empire, and prepared it for its fall. The treachery and disingonuousness of Turkey to tho friends that aro disposed to support and assist it, and its reckless dishonesty, have been so glaring as to produce a combination among the Great Powers of the world without parallol in history.

LAWYERS' bills ot costs have formed tho subject of much discussion in the Courts and the press lately. A month or two ago wo wero edified by a discourse on this topic by Mr Travers, a Wellington barrister, who declaimed with much virtuous elo<iuonco against tho practice of piling on costs which is so common in tho law Courts of tho colony. Thui ono of the.leading barristers in New Zealand should come forward as tho champion of oppressed clients was rogarded os such a remarkable instance of awakening repentenco that it wao believed that the Millennium could not he very far off. Tho fact that the costs involvod in legal proceedings even in tho inferior Courts havo been almost a bartojustice has long been recognised as ono of tho cryingovils of our system of jurisprudence,but tho most sanguine never ventured to hope that reform would couio from withiu tho legal profession. From time to timo faint protests have been raised by tbo losing parties to suits against the monstrous bills of costs, often exceeding in amount the sum ii dispute, but tho subject has been dealt with more in the light of v joko to relieve the tedium of some uuintorcstiug caso than with any really earnest desire to effect a reform. For instauco, in the District Court the other day ono lawyer, referring to the costs on the other side, remarked that " they required watching," a truism which is morn or less applicable to tho profession all tho world over ; but tho observation only provoked a laugh. It is a hopeful feature, however, when wo find litigants mutually agreeing that .'jo costs shall bo awarded unless a certain fixed amount of tho sum claimed shall bo proved lo have been due, as was done in two cases at tho last sitting of the Court. Any arrangement which will rcduco tho fees aud professional charges within some reasonable limits will be gladly received bythepulilic. It is to bo feared, howover, that tho good intentions by which tho lawyers profess to bo actuated will go to improve tho thoroughfares of a certain tropical region. Self-in-terest is nufortunately a very powerful motivo iv this wicked world. Already we find that Mr Travers' preaching und practice aro singularly at variance. By a species of retributive justico ho is the first to be accused of that very sin which ho deprecated on a former occasion. In an action tried at Wellington, Browu v. the Tramway Company, judgment with costs was given against tho plaintiff. The hearing of the caao had lasted four hours, aud Mr.Travers, who was ono of tho defendants as well as their Counsel, sent in a bill ot costs amounting to eighty guineas, or twenty guineas an hour for his own professional services. Brown protested, aud tho ltogistrar taxed tho bill down to £55. Mr Olivier applied on Brown's behalf that it should bo further reduced, (mowing that in England the most eminent lawyers are only allowed a hearing fee of ten guineas for tho first day, and seven for each pucceoding day. Mr Travers appeared and argued in support of his own claim. The Chief Justice in the course of liia remarks, said :—" I think tho fees ought to be a great deal less hero than in England. Everybody throughout the country—that is, all professional people — i_>et leas hero than nt home. Judges are uaid less, the oflicers of the Court get less, those in professions generally get less remuneration here than at Home, and I do not sco any reason why counsel should get more. I think they should get less. I have no doubt that the fees which havo been allowed here arc far too high. The feeg allowed for actions in the Court of Appeal are most excessive. There fees of 100 guineas and over are allowed to counsel for appearing in cases of the smallest importance—that is, comparative importance —and often these high fees aru allowed to more counsel than one. In tho Supreme Court it is the same. I thiuk, too, in the Kcsident Magistrate's Court the evil is the same. There fees far too high are allowod, and in many cases they are allowed when) there ought to be no fees paid at all. As I said before, tho fees horo uhould be less rather than more than in England." Mr Olivier, who ought to know all about it, here said that many of the briefs and pleadings contained useless padding, put iv with a view to swelling the bilj of costs. Heferring to the case under notice. His Honor went on to say ;—" I believe in England no higher fee would be allowed to the very highest and most eminent council, men making from £7,000 to £10,000 a-year—l do not think one of these gcntlemeu would have been allowed io a case like the

present more than 30 or 35 guineas. , ." " No doubt labourers get more here than in England, in some cases doublo. But it ia not so with all grades of society. We do not find other professional people getting more hero than in England. Doctors, for example, we do not find making many thousands a year. And lawyers should be content totakelowerfees, like other persons. I ace no reason why they should not be content with lower fees. How far lower they should be as between lawyer and client is a matter for themselves, but as between party and party 1 see no reason why the taxing ollicers should not make them lower. It is within my own knowledge that fees charged on demurrers are far too high—they are most excessive, in fact. I am glad to be allowed to express my opinion on this question ; and I do not sec why the Registrar should not follow the opinions that have been expressed in the Legislature. The Legislature have provided that in appeals troth tho R.M. Court tho fee shall be only ten guineas, to cover everything ; and it has in other ways expressed its opinion, and I do not see why the Registrar should not pay heed to it. I taink that in an ordinary demurrer seven or eight guineas should be ample. Then in many cases two counsel are allowed for where there should only be one." And having delivered himself of this homily, and discharged his conscience of the burden, his honor forthwith stultified his own remarks by declining to make any further reduction beyond tho amount already taxed off. As some consolation to Brown, however, he declined to allow costs on this application. His honor's reason for not interfering with the Registrar's decision was that the officer having been selected for the position ought to be competent to judge of the amount which should be allowed, though his honor had only just said what was tantamount to stating that the amount was far in excess of what ought to have been allowed, from which it would follow, to any ordinary mind, except that of the sapient judge's, which is evidently not an ordinary mind, that tho Registrar was not " competent to judge," and, pushing the matter to its logical conclusion, that he ought to be removed from office. When such ridiculous decisions are given by the judicial bench there is little ground for hoping that any effectual reform will come from within tho profession. The only remedy appears to be legislative enactment.