THE CHIEF JUSTICE ON ARTICLED CLERKS.

Globe, Volume V, Issue 577, 25 April 1876, Page 4

THE CHIEF JUSTICE ON ARTICLED CLERKS.

His Honor the Chief Justice made the following remarks at the Banco Sittings of the Supreme Court at Wellington a few days ago, upon a matter which is of considerable importance to the legal profession:— There is no recognised Law Society, or rather the Law Society is not in a position to take action in reference to the matters to which lam about to refer. All I could do, therefore, was to notify the barristers and solicitors by circular of my intention to allude to the matter in open Court, a course in which I think there is no impropriety. The two matters to which I desire to draw the attention of the barristers and solicitors are these : as to the terms of the Law Practitioners Act, and the supposed compliance with it by law students and articled clerks. I have reason to believe that some members of the profession and their articled clerks conceive that they sufficiently comply with the law by acting as clerks to the solicitors, though the solicitor may be carrying on business at a very great distance from where the clerk is employed. In such cases the clerk is not acting under his articles under the immediate supervision of his principal, and I have no hesitation whatever in saying that until the judges of the Supreme Court after argument declared me to be wrong, I shall not view such service as service under articles; Of course I say this unsuthoritatively. I simply intimate what my action will be until it is decided after argument that I am wrong. The matter has already been discussed and decided in Victoria in a manner which accords with my views. In 1863 a case was brought before the Supreme Court — (which is reported in the second volume of Wyatt and Webb’s Reports, page 277) the particulars of which are stated with sufficient clearness in the side note, which is as follows :—“ G., articled clerk to M , at Melbourne, was absent from Melbourne during three of the five years of the articles, at Castlemaine, managing there a branch business of the firm of M, During that time be managed subject to the daily correspondence and orders of his master; and his master was frequently at Castlemaine and himself frequently at Melbourne. He thus retained to a certain extent the advantage of the personal teaching and direction of his master. On motion for the admission of G, opposed by the Law Institute. Held, that the service at Castlemaine could not count; and admission refused, but leave given to apply again after two years’further sufficient service.” That decision is entirely in accordance with what I conceive to be the law, and is one which I certainly should have adopted, quite irrespective of this decision. If the reason for that rule is proper in the case of a solicitor and his articled clerk, it certainly applies with much greater force to the case of a law student; moreover, with regard to the law student it seems to me that he is not complying with the law if he is acting as an attorney’s clerk : that is to say, if a barrister also carries on business as a solicitor a law student in service with him is not, bona fide, employing his time in the s+ndy of the law if he is running from one office to another serving processes. Those are not the duties of a barrister’s pupil. On the other hand, it seems to me that where a barrister is carrying on business as an attorney it would not be improper that a barrister’s pupil should be employed in drafting pleadings and drawing conveyances That might properly come within the study of the law, but certa'nly the ordinary work of an attorney’s clerk is not studying the law. I may say further that according to the Law Practitioners Act and the Supreme Court rules it is quite cleai that the examination which a law student has to pass would make it absolutely necessary that be should devote himself very closely during hi>whole three years to the study of the law ; it is indeed, almost necessity that he should begin with a very considerable know ledge of the classics, and a good general knowledge, in order that he should be abl< to devote himself closely to the three years’ study of the law ; otherwise it is impossible, unless he is an extraordinary genius indeed, to pass the examination prescribed. I think it necessary to make this reference to the subject in open court, for it is really the barristers and solicitors, more than the clerk’, who are responsible for due compliance with the law. They should see that this is really the only mode in which the law can be complied with, and it will only be deceiving young men if they are allowed to pass their time in a manner contrary to the law and the regulations. I know of no other mode of bringing these matters under the notice of the profession else I should have adopted it