LAW AMENDMENT?

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 918, 10 September 1910, Page 10

LAW AMENDMENT?

AN.'UNDEMOCRATIC -DEMOCRAT;-:. .'. Sir,—lt is with considerable amazement/ thai. I. -notice that the .AttorneyGeneral (Dr Findlay) is'actually' reintroducing the intended enactment to be known as the Law,'. Practitioners: Amendment' Act (surely a new use of, the term "amendmentl"). This triumph- of -democratic: legislation 'aims,at' the deprivation of. the" right'of solicitors • who enter into "practice two years after the measure, becomes, law. to be admitted as . barristers. ..after., fire, years ,of practice, without the necessity, of their .passing-.the-', examinations, for barristers prescribed ■ by the 'University of Now Zealand. Now, sir, no. one. will deny that this; right was ■ inadvisedly given in the. first/pl.aei?, but: why'-'iameiid" the la iv without making" it retrospective? -If the'solicitors who have been admitted as' barristers -without' examination have shown, by their inex'pertness how unjustified-the present law,is, then why allow them ; to continue to/.practise as. barristers? they are the very, persons, who should first ,feel the'effects of "reforming" legislation I To make the Act operate prospectively only is a dog-in-the-manger policy without any argument in its justification. It is, in- short, grossly selfish and undemocratic, and not calculated to inspire thinking public with any very considerable belief in the ' 'democratic'? ideals of tho present Administration. It is really surprising thatsuch a professedly idealistic legislator as Dr.. Findlay is' to be founds fathering such an. iniquitous/proposition , as. that contained in this Bill.: T would assert, without fear: of contradiction, that- if Dr. Findlay's measure were made to apply to all solicitors, past and prospective, without barristers' examination qualifications, there : would not:bo-a single complaint from any source having a justifiable, foundation. It;is quite idle for the-Attorney-Gen-eral to assert otherwise. Personally, I consider that with the simplicity ofour New Zealand law, barristers' examinations are unnecessary—or at least unnecessarily difficult—but while things are as they are, why give a very-great advantage to one which, is denied to another ?. I trust that the democratic —truly democratic—and, mi'sojfisn section of the House is waiting to give the proposed. new measure -the reception it deserves—which is a long and well-merited adjournment "sine die."— 1../am,':etc., - ; /, :70 PRACTISING SOLICITOR.