LAWYERS’ CONFERENCE

Greymouth Evening Star, 21 April 1938, Page 7

LAWYERS’ CONFERENCE

PROFESSION’S IDEALS JUDGE AND JURY PAYMENTS [PEB PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CHRISTCHURCH, April 20. “We are lawyers, as a profession, we know no politics or party. We should, and do, I feel sure, express our thinks to our Attorney-General, who has throughout his term of office remained one of us, while at the same time he hi|s, no doubt, remained perfectly loyal and helpful to his colleagues.” . , x „ +v ,„ Mr H. F. O’Leary, President of the New Zealand Law Society, said this when paying a tribute, in his presidential address at the Society’s conference, to the sympathy and con-, sid'eration of ithe AttorneyJ-Generall, | Hon. H. G. R. Mason. “Two years ago, Mr Mason attended the conference at Dunedin,” Mr O’Leary said. “He had then been in office only 4 few months, but, his address at that conference, and the views he expressed led us to think we had an Attorney-General to. whom the profession could look with confidence, for the sympathetic consideration of any matters affecting the profession which might be placed before him. We also felt that, on any subjects on which the profession was competent to express an opinion, the opinion would be given due weight. In no way have we been disappointed in these expectations. We have found Mr Mason accessible at all times, helpful always: sympathetic with and mindful of our views and opinions, Which, indeed, he has not waited for us to express, but has approached us for.”

Pointing out that the present rate of salaries for judges had been in operation since 1920, Mr O’Leary expressed -the opinion, at the opening session of the Society’s conference, that the time had come for a revision. It was a fact, Mr O’Leary said, that barristers made large sacrifices in accepting appointment to the Supreme Court Bench, and that others delayed acceptance, or refused it, because of the sacrifice involved. Judges’ positions were among the most important in the land, and should be adequately paid. Mr O’Leary said that the salary of a Puisne Judge, after the payment of his income and employment tax for 1936-37, was £1,600 net, and he suggested that this salary was inadequate for the position. Speaking of poor peoples’ caluses, Mr O’Leary said that he had no doubt that every law practitioner from the King’s Counsel to the most-recently admitted junior, would willingly undertake any work allotted, thus bringing credit to himself and honour to the profession. By doing so, he would assist in refuting the accusation, sometimes made, that the legal profession was selfish, and unwilling to do anything unless it brought gain.

“It is realised that the amount paid 1 to jurors is too small, and it is being adjusted to 13/4 a day,” said the Attorney-General, Hon. H. G. R. Mason, who was speaking in aj discussion which followed the reading of a paper on the jury system, by Mr A. H. Johnstone, K.C., of Auckland. “The labourer is worthy of his hire,” Mr Johnstone said. “It is a. distinct hardship to a working man that he should be inadequately paid for the services which he gives to his country. At present, a juror’s pay is 10/6 a day, from which the employment levy is deducted. It should he increased to make it equal to his average daily earnings.” In announcing that the rate was to be adjusted, Mr Mason said it would still leave room for an element of service. The new rate would not be full remuneration. TOO LONG VACATIONS? CHRISTCHURCH. April 21. The Christmas vacation of a fortnight, when all legal offices were closed, should be reconsidered. The profession had the right to preserve continuity of service, and lawyers must always be available when needed. Mr. A. C. Stephens of Dunedin, advanced this argument, when he spoke of the relations of the legal profession and the public, in the course of an address to the conference of the New Zealand Law Society to-day. Although the vacation was no longer than the holidays of public servants and employees of commercial undertakings, there was, said Mr. Stephens, a certain amount of complaint from business and commercial men, because their legal advisers were not available for the Christmas fortnight. This might be adjusted to the advantage oi everyone. Mr. Stephens emphasised that a lawyer owed to the public gratuitous service. “He should be prepared to give assistance to those who are genuinely too poor to pay for legal assistance,” he added. “At present, a considerable amount of work is done for nothing, as no genuine case of distress should go without redress. Organised legal aid to the poor is now being formulated, so that the poor persons relief procedure which has been so successful in England, will soon be adopted to suit conditions here. This matter has received the attention of the Law Revision Committee, and a good scheme has been outlined.”

The duty of lawyers to give general service to the community in matters outside their purely professional sphere was also stressed by Mr. Stephens.