SOLICITORS' FEES.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1839, 14 January 1880, Page 3

SOLICITORS' FEES.

At the Kaiapoi Court on Monday a passage of words oocurred between Mr Neck, solicitor, and Mr Beswiok, the .presiding magistrate, through the refusal to grant solicitor's costs in a civil case. The subject in dispute relating to trespass of pigs had been adjourned at last Court to be made the matter of reference to arbitrators, but the plaintiff took no steps in the matter, and ■was on this occasion represented by counsel. Mr Neck, in a tone of surprise, asked why professional costs were not allowed. The magistrate replied because, as the case was virtually settled except the assessment of damages, he considered there was no occasion for the plaintiff to engage a solicitor, or that the solicitor's costs should be inflicted on the defendant. Mr Neck considered that therefore the solicitors might make themselves scarce from the face .of the earth. His client, as would be seen by the very faot that he had carelessly omitted to get an arbitrator, was not capable of oonduoting his case, and it was necessary that he should employ counsel, and now he would ask why no fee was allowed ? Mr Beswick said he simply should not allow a fee in the case. Mr Neck desired then to know if the Court wbb going to take upon itself this arbitrary way of seCtling matters, if so he should refer it to a higher power to be dealt with. Mr Beswick, with warmth—"Do you intend your remarks as implying a threat ?" Mr Neck —" Not exactly so. My meaning is that this question of costs ought to be fixed." Mr Beswiok—"lt is entirely in the power of the Court to award costs." Mr Neck —" I should like to have the practice of charging costs Bettled." Mr Beßwick —"Call the next caße." Subsequently a more amicable discussion on the matter ensued, during which Mr Neck said he had no intention to cast any reflection on the Resident Magistrate's ruling. He considered however the rules affecting costs ought to be more clearly understood. At Ashburton he was one day before Mr Campbell put off with a guinea, while in a subsequent case to-day, Mr Beswick, he found, allowed two guineaß. Mr Beswick said the rule was to allow one fuinea for amounts under £5, two guineas or amounts over £5 and under £2O, and three guineas over £2O. Mr Neck wished that such an arrangement prevailed generally. This matter ought to be considered by the Law Society.