LAW ENTRANCE EXAMINATION.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18550, 27 November 1925, Page 11

LAW ENTRANCE EXAMINATION.

TO ' TUT EDITOn OF "thz peess." .-Sir,—The-letters of "Lex" and "Conveyancer" in your issue of to-day contain certain statements that call for answer. Some of these arc based upon misapprehension. "Lex" says: "itseems also to follow that legal subjects passed by such a student (i.e. "a niaii of practice rather than theory') will, under certain circumstances, be taken from him. it amounts to this that a student holds a certificate from the University, saying ho has passed the Law Professional Examination in given subjects, but the regulations will not regard him as having passed in them. "Conveyancer says: "A student who is credited with any Law subject must take Jurisprudence, Constitutional History, and English up to LL.B. standard, and Latin to LL.B. and B.A. standard before 1929, or he will lose all the subjects that the University at present savs that he has passed in. These statements are by no means correct. If a-student has begun his course by taking his Law Professional subjects first, a most undesirable practice, ho will have full credit for those in which he has passed if before March Ist 1929, he passes m the remainder of his Law subjects, and passes his examination in General Knowledge. If he has entered for the Matriculation examination this year, it will be sufficient for him to pass that examination, taking Latin as a subject. Otherwise he must, not later than December, 1928, sit at the Entrance Scholarship Examination, and on, the • papers set for that examination pass as for Matriculation "with credit." This is much easier than obtaining 50 per cent, of marks in Latin, English, History, and j two optional subjects. Or he could £t for Latin, English (or Philosophy;, Jurisprudence, and Constitutional History as for the LL-B. degree (a course that. "Conveyancer" seems to consider compulsory),* but there would be no object in his doing this, as, in the circumstances he could -not be credited with those subjects towards his'diploma as LL.B. Now, if a student is credited with . any pass in his- Law Professional subiec*«s before March • Ist next> Jb© : must

bo credited with at least two. The largest number remaining therefore win be five, litis it is possible to puss in one year; no student should require more than two years. 'there will be. therefore, at least oue whole vear, ami in many cases two whole years, lor the student to give to preparation for his General Knowledge examination. At present by the regulations of the Lniversity no stuueut can count a pass in any -jaw professional subject towards the LL.IS. degree, until he has matriculated, taking Latin as a subject, or, if he has matriculated without Latin, has subsequently passed m Latin as for the B.A. or LL.B. degree. The judges have now, in the exercise of their powers under the Law Practitioners Act, made a similar regulation to the effect that no student enn count a pass in any law profess'onal subject towards qualification for admission as a solicitor until lie has passed his (Jeneral Knowledge examination. They, however, safeguard the rights of students by allowing them three full years to qualify for admission in accordance with the course ificv have entered upon. """ The students have no -ground of complaint. The General Knowledge Examination is an integral part of .their course. The proper, natural, and' logical position it should occupy in that j course is at the beginning." "By not I taking it then students rim the risk of an alteration in its standard before they sit for it. Had this examination heen made easier, there would have been no complaint. As it has happened the risk these students took has fallen in, and complaints are made of harshness and injustice. Such complaints arc quite unjustified. "Lex" writes: "Mr Rowe says the effect will be to make all take. the LL.B. course. "Does the country want an army of LL.B.'s. or does it v.:u\t men with working experience:' The 'theory' man is to bo fostered, the practical man to he throttled.'' This is, of course, arrant nonsense. TTic only effect of the regulations is to require a higher standard of general knowledge before admission to practice. The present standard is lamentably low. so low that the members of the recent Royal Commission reportt.nl that in New Zealand the expression "my learned friend" is in danger of being regarded as a gentle sarcasm. The knowledge of lav." required is the same for all candidates for admission, and I cannot see where the "practical man" (whatever "Lex" means) has superior claims to such "theory" men (us

"Lex" calls graduates), as Mr Justice Alpers. Messrs A. T. Donnelly, W. J. Hunter, J. R. Cuningham. A. STaylor, W. J. Sim. M. J." Gresson. and many others of our leading lawyers. "Lex" states that the Law. Society wishes to limit the profession. The conference I mentioned had nothing to do with these regulations, but in- any case I think I may say that the New Zealand Law Society is concerned only to remove the stigma at present lying upon the profession, and ensuring something like a reasonable standard of scholarship in a learned profession. The suggestion of "Lex" that students or parents should have taken part in the conference is teo absurd for further notice. In regard to the complaint of "Conveyancer" that a student who has matriculated without taking Latin", buttaking, say, French instead, and now finds himself under the necessitv of taking four subjects at the LL.B. standard, it has to be said that by leaving out Latin it is clear that the student did not at matriculation corntemplate a Law course, and did not regard the matriculation examination in tho light of tho Solicitors'. General Knowledge examination. In such a case he also takes the risk of an alteration in the standard of the last-men-tioned examination. Up to now he could have completed his pass in that examination by taking Latin; if he has not done so he must either pass in the necessary subjects for the LL.B. degree., or. take the examination prescribed by the new regulations. But he has suffered no injustice. I'think the same is true in ' regard to Provisional Matriculation. The regulations in regard to this matter apply only to students over, 30 years of age, who in the ordinary course would have difficulty- in passing the matriculation examination, with a variety of subjects, including arithmetic, .but who might be capable of taking a degree course in Arts or Law or Music, or other faculty. And so a student who could not matriculate in the ordinary may be provisionally matriculated, and, if he does well, have his provisional matriculation confirmed, and go on, say, to the LL.B. degree. If he does so he qualifies for admission, without having originally matriculated in the usual way. But provisional matriculation is not intended to enable intending solicitors to escape their General Knowledge examination, and as far as I can see the new regulations have no effect whatever upon students who have been granted provisional matriculation. In theory, it is true, a student whose provisional matriculation has been confirmed, and who has passed in his law professional subjects, could then pass the matriculation examination with Latin as the Solicitors' General Knowledge examination, and so qualify for admission, whereas now he will be required in such a case to pass a more difficult examination. But as the sole object of provisional matriculation itTia dispense.with the passing of the matriculation examination, it is clear that no student would attempt to qualify for admission in this way. If he could pass the matriculation examination there would be no necessity for hi"s obtaining provisional matriculation. — Yours, etc.. THOMAS W. ROWE. Christeluirch, November 26th.