The Timaru Herald. MONDAY, JUNE 12, 1882.

Timaru Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 2409, 12 June 1882, Page 2

The Timaru Herald. MONDAY, JUNE 12, 1882.

Sib George Geey has earned the second reading of the Law Practitioners Act Amendment Bill without a division. This fact may fairly be assumed to prore one, of .two. things. Either the time, has arrived for the legal profession, as a close corporation, to be reformed out of existence by general consent ; or else the lawyers aro wonderfully weakly represented m .the House. Sir George Grey's Bill is no timid Measure,' merely feeling the way towards reforms of particular abuses. On the contrary, it i 8 a Measure of the most radical kind, which, if it passes into law, will practically abolish the exclusive character "of the profession, and make it almost as easy to become a lawyer as it is to become a commission agent. It prop'oaes firstly, that any man of good character • who passes the necessary examination shall be admitted to practice at any time, and' secondly, that any man, without examination, may be employed by anyone else to plead a cause m the Courts of law/ It will be . seen at a glance that, if these proposals are adopted,, the legal profession will immediately cease to be a pursuit" confined to a limited number of specially trained practi:ioners, arid tne widest' competition will be established amongst all who havo my aptitude for the business. In short, free trade will be substituted for, the effective protection which lawyers enjoy lnder tub' existing' system, ,''\ : j It might reasonably have beer* >x* iccted that such a change as this Would lavo been stubbornly resisted, not only'" •y tbe lawjeri themtfelveß, but by many

others who have no personal interest m the question. What we m*ari is that if there have hitherto been good reasons for the privileges accorded to the legal profession by ancient tradition and by successive enactments, there ought m the ordinary course of things, to have been a powerful display of arguments against a Measure which proposes to sweep those privileges bodily away. The lawyers have always been understood to constitute one of the most influential sections of ' the community, if not the most influential section ; and it appears incredible that, if their influence haß been based on a Bolid foundation of right and reason, they should submit to be deprived of all their exclusive character, without making even a serious effort m defence of it. Yet the second reading of the Bill has been carried without a division, and there seems to be every likelihood of its passing through Committee just as easily. It is true that one lawyer, and he a man of some weight, opposed the Bill, strenuously on grounds of public expediency. Another, who also stands high m his profession, said he hoped it would not pasß, though he declined to opposo it actively. But on the other hand, its promoters supported it with the utmost confidence and vigor, and several lawyers were among those who did so. One, who has been m the law for forty years, and has also been Minister of Justice and a Judge, recommended the House to pass the Bill. The reason why a division was not called for, we are told, was simply because the opponents of the Bill were so few that they thought it wiser not to expose their weakness. Surely this is a very extraordinary state of affairs, and one which we cannot readily account for. "Are we to be told that the influence of the legal profession is a mere delusion, that the necessity for such an organisation has no real existence, and that the public hold the profession m so little estimation, that they ore willing and anxious to see its privileges done away with P If so, then it is most astonishing that the Law Practitioners Acts have been allowed to remain m force so' long. But we cannot help thinking the case is capable of some other explanation than this; and we should be glad to hear what the lawyers themselves have to say about it. We are quite aware, of course, that a Bill is often outwardly supported by many Members who do not approve of its provisions, and who, while they vote for it, Bincerely trust it will not pass. We have no doubt that was so with this Bill. It is not every Member, by a long way, who has the courage of his opinions; especially where those opinions are adverse to what appears to be the popular view. Many Members, again, support Bills which they do not approve of, or at least abstain from opposing them, because they feel sure the Legislative Council will throw them out and thus save them all trouble and responsibility. We venture to say that a large proportion of those who supported Sir George Grey the other night, did so with a feeling of implicit faith m the Upper House. It has come, indeed, to be regarded as an understood thing that any of Sir George Grey's startling Measures may safely be passed by the House of Representatives, m" the certainty of their being thrown out "m another place." Last session he earned a batch of Bills of this kind, including this very Law Practitioners Bill, with hardly any opposition ; but the Cowncil rejected them all without the slightest hesitation. The session before last, the same thing took place. One Bill which Sir George carried through the lower House without a division, proposed to confer on Mr Moorhouse a free railway pass for life as a reward for his eminent public services j and nobody was ever able to ascertain whether it was intended for an insult or a compliment, or whether it was merely intended as, a test of how much the House would stand from Sir George Grey. The Council of course threw the Bill out without troubling themselves to enquire into its purpose. In a word, the House have habitually indulged Sir George Grey's freaks, almost to any extent, on the tacit understanding, that that indulgence would lead to no practical results. Sooner or later, however, there must be an end of this sort of thing. Last session the Council were very angry at the degree of responsibility thus thrown upon them. They were getting tired of " doing the dirty work of the House of Representatives," and incurring all the odium which Sir George Grey was only too eager to arouse against them. They rejected his Bills, : but there were not wanting suggestive indications of a determination on their part not to perform the Bame office again. It will be interesting to see how they will treat tho Law Practitioners Bill when it reaches; them. They would be fully justified m passing it without amendment, though entirely disapproving of it, on the ground that it has been passed three times by the other Chamber, and' this time, immediately after an appeal to the country. If they do so, there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth among the legal profession, who will discern, when it is too late, the mistake they made m allowing the Bill to pass the lower House year after year ■, without offering any effectual resistance to it.