LAWYERS AND LAND AGENTS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15668, 22 January 1913, Page 2

LAWYERS AND LAND AGENTS.

TO THE EDITOIt. Sin,—A letter appearing in your issue of the 15th ult, and under the signature of ( tho Secretary of tho Otago Law Society, escaped my notice. My attention was drawn to it, and I take this opportunity •of replying thereto. At the outsot of this discussion I expreesed tho opinion that tho various practices to which I alluded were neither approved of nor adopted by the majority of the legal profession in this city. It will, therefore, be a matter of gratification to learn from such an authoritative sourco U6 the secretary of the Law Society that this opinion has to a certain extent been con-Ermed and strengthened. It must, however, considerably detract from tho value of this official disclaimer when it is considered that such has proceeded subsequent to publio attention having been drawn to the matter, after tho various practices had been pointed out, and when any further disregard of their existence could hardly be continued with propriety by tho eocietv. Tho complaint which I furnished foot at tho instigation or knowledge of amy firm o£ land agents) briefly amounted to this—that certain legal firms indulged in the land agency business, and advertised properties for sale, after tho manner of land agents, 6uch a proceeding, in my opinion, Being contrary to tho professional etiquette which should bo emblematic of the legal profession. Also, that in the course of this business certain legal firms, when placing properties _ with land agents, imposed certain conditions and restrictions of a nature detrimental to the pockets of the agents but of benefit to their own. I tako this opportunity of reiterating these assertions, and will proceed further, and state, that inasmuch as the fact that this species of business has been carried on is known to every member of the profession, it must of necessity have also been known to tho society, which is composed of members of tho profession. To maintain or suggest otherwise is nothing short of an insult to the intelligence of your readers. If anything wero wanting to confirm my assertions, I would refer the Law Society to the following facts:— (1) The fact that for a very considerable period, and, indeed, in comparatively recent editions of the local papers, several legal firni6 have advertised properties for sale, after the manner of land agents, and have appended their names • thereto. Have tho members of tho Council of tho Law Society, either by a peculiar coincidence or by a singular and convenient deformity of vision, failed to observe these advertise mente and permitted them to pass unnoticed and' unreproved? (2) The fact that a recent legal correspondent in this matter, far from disputing tho existence of such practices, admitted it and sought to justify it by virtue of some approving decision said to have been arrived at by a body of legal gentlemen representing the legal profession of Otago. Until their attention has been drawn to this matter has thei Council of tho Law Socety uttered one 6ingle word, of protest during that long interval of time? In what manner can they refute or reconcile either of the two attitudes?

(3) Tho fact that tho land agency business has assumed such large proportions in the work of some legal firms, that certain members of tho 6taff devote tho major portion of their time to it. (4) That in the case of ono land agent at any rate, a provision is inserted in the memorandum of 6ale, by virtue of which any purchaser signing this sale no.te not oniy agrees to purchase tho property the particular subject of, the contract, but at one and the same time, knowingly or unknowingly, enters into an agreement to employ a particular solicitor to prepare the transfer, etc. lam not prepared to stato that this is insisted upon in every case, but I put it to the Law Society that 6uch a provision should not be inserted in any contract of ealc.

(S) That it has, at one time or other, been tho experience of every land agent that when a property is sold to a client (who desires to employ his own solicitor in preparing the transfer), and the title deeds are in the hands of the solicitor for the vendor, certain solicitors placed in the latter position will, beeauso the work is going out of their own offioe, obstruct the sale. For example, where the vendor purchases a leasehold farm and desires an extension of the lease, the disappointed solicitor will in somo oases advise his client not to grant tho extension asked for. Had he, however, been preparing the transfer, the attitude would have been totally different.

(6) Jhat, in the case of one legal firm at any rate, two members of their stall havo admittedly and openly carried on tho business of property-selling, subject to the agents' terms.

(7) The very significant fact that, whereas in tlio past some legal firms have been indulging in tho business of land agents (either directly or indirectly) since the passmg of tho Land Agents' Registration Act, in the list of registered land agents the namc6 of such firms ore conspicuous by their absence. Apparently they disdain to do pubheiy that wmoh they did. privately. It is,- however, but just and proper to 6tate (what I have already averred on two previous occasions) that farms indulging in such practices aro in tho mmority. in the majority of cases firms receive every assistance from lawyers in completing land transactions. One firm, for instance, enjoying a lucrative practice, periodically torwards to all agents hate of properties for sale, suyh lists being bereft of conditions or restrictions. Photographs arc also taken by tho firm and sent to agents as an l additional aid, and in no instance is one penny of tlio agents' commission expected or demanded.

The Law Society " invites " the names of tho offenders, together with , particulars of tho ott'enccs and tangible evidence of their commission. In the event of such not being forthcoming, the society, in plain English, asserts that the accusations are false. I must confess to being not a little surprised at the publication of such a statement as proceeding from tho Law Council. Without affording the society any duo at the present 6tate of tho proceedings as to whether written and incontrovertible evidence of these practices is forthcoming, 1 propose to assume for the-moment, that such is not tho oase—that no such evidence can be produced—and to point out to tho public how safely and sincerely such an "invitation" can bo made. ( Does tho average trespasser leave behind him epme written or tangible evidenco of his guilt and identity, so that it might bo used as evidence against him? However much we may differ as to the propriety or otherwise of lawyers indulging in theso practices, the Law Council, as gentlemen with a (knowledge of the world, should at least credit any lawyer indulging in such practices with being ordinarily cute and careful, and not the least likely to conduct himself like tin idiot, and leave a receipt for hie portion of the commission. The Land Agents' Association, however, is to be established, and I trust at no distant date. Immediately this is effected I shall bring these matters before the Association and request them to accept the challenge of the council, and on two conditions. Firstly, that we shall not be presented with tho futile spectacle of defendants sitting in judgment upon themselves, and secondly that 'such proceedings shall bo open to the press. In the meantime the Land Agents' Registration Act will provide sufficient security, for I fear we hear too much of the etiquette of an honourable profession, and " experience " too little of its benefits. Before concluding I desire to fulfil a duty to the legal profession which-1 consider is peouliarly necessary to an impartial consideration of this matter. If an advocate entertains sentiments injurious t to the defence ho is engaged in, ho is not only justified, bnt is duty bound, to conceal them.. So on the other hand, if his own genuine sentiments, or anything with his situation, can add strength to his professional assistance, he is bound to throw them into the scale. In addressing myself, however, to gentlemen not un-zealous for tho honour of their great profession, but visibly indignant at any attack upon its principles. but who would perhaps be impatient of arguments from a suspected quarter, I hasten to assure tho Law Society that I am, and have ever been, attached to the gemiino principles and eontiments adopted by tho profession as a whole. I attack it only upon 'the failure pf a minority to rcoognise principles not only consistent with its permanence and security, but without tho establishment of which, it never could have had existence or respect, I have, therefore, studiously avoided all allusion whioli may seem to convey undeserved reproach on the profession as a whole, because I oonooive such would bo unnecessary to tho purposo of this argumont and.distinctly unjustifiable. But lam entitled to say thaifc if the Law Society pan publish sentiments without having it. imputed bo them tlnat they wcro npt genuine, it is fair and reasonable to allego that others, in bringing forward different sentiments, have a right to.be equally oxempt from impure motives. livery man has a right to publish what he thinks upon matters of public conccrn, to complain of grievances, and expose abuses. It is a rieht which has over been recognised and which oannot bo annihilated without at the snmo time putting an end to all freedom of discussion.—l am, etc., Cynious. Dunedin, January 18,