Chair of Law

Press, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 26986, 11 March 1953, Page 8

Chair of Law

The Dean of the Faculty of Law at Canterbury University College (Mr E P. Wills) wisely directed attention recently to some *of the implications of the proposal to establish a chair of law at the college, and to university trends generally. Mr Wills was able to speak both as a lecturer and a practising lawyer, and it is satisfactory that lawyers in their advocacy of a chair of law are not overlooking some of the problems it will pose for their profession, and are prepared to tackle them as they arise. Law is an old-established faculty of the college, and there are now 100 students; but the teaching has always been done by a parttime staff, at some times illrewarded for their efforts, though their position is now much better. In the purely professional subjects of the Ll.B. course, part-time lecturers can probably provide the best teaching because of their intimate association with the law in practice. But a full-time teacher with the standing of a professor would make administration easier, would give the faculty a more authoritative voice, would help students taking an honours course for the master’s degree, and would introduce *a fresn mind to the ordinary course, particularly in such of the academic subjects as a professor from outside New Zealand might teach. All this would help to ensure that the law is still served with professional standards as well as mere competence, and that its practitioners would be fitted to retain the important place they hold in the wider life of the community. It is easy to understand the anxiety of the profession that the law course should not become too academic. This is not likely to happen while most students gain valuable training as clerks in legal offices (which Mr Wills aptly likened to laboratory w’ork), and while lecturers in the professional subjects remain, as they i must for a long time, practising lawyers. On the other hand, the ’appointment of a professor in law • would almost certainly mean some, i and possibly an increasing number of, day-time lectures. One of the I problems of legal offices will be to I j give clerks time to attend these: lectures; but as this problem has jbeen solved by some trades in the;

daylight training of apprentices, it should not be beyond a learned profession like the law. A proportion of day-time lectures may also mean that more law students will want to do a large part of their course as full-time students. The question of how much practical experience is necessary for a qualified practitioner is one that does not seem to have been answered yet, probably because it has not really arisen. The time may be coming when it will have to be answered. As Mr Wills said, lawyers cannot ignore the trend in the University to make the professors the examiners. This trend is in accord with the academic freedom of a university to teach in its own way, but it may upset the present balance between learning and practice. Because of the arrangement by which external examiners in the professional subjects are approved by the Law Society, it has been possible to continue the system of accepting university qualifications as adequate qualifications for admission. This arrangement may not always stand. If there is a change it would probably lead to adoption of the English practice under which a degree in law is only a university qualification land graduates cannot be admitted j as barristers or solicitors until they ■ have passed professional examinations. •