Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE: TUESDAY, JULY 3, 1883.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1324, 3 July 1883, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE: TUESDAY, JULY 3, 1883.

I’hk interest taken in the House on the second reading of the Law Practitioners Bill was of a twofold character. The Government, it was well known, were adverse to the measure; but the personal influence Sir Geobge Gbey wields, when carrying out the role of an independent member, was too much for them to care about pressing the question to a division, so the Bill passed the second reading on the voices. The object of the Bill is to do away with the necessity of candidates who are desirous of being admitted into the legal prosession, having to undergo what is is termed an examination in general knowledge, A similar Bill, as many of our readers will recollect, came before the House last session, and was thrown out, I'he same fate, however, possibly, awaits the present measure, In Mr Bath&atk, Sir Geosge Gbey found a warm supporter, and one who held the opinion that the Bill becoming law would tend to largely popularise the study of the law, and increase the number of lawyers. This is a doubtful reeommendaiion. Mr Peacock’ who spoke against the Bill, advanced the usual stock arguments. He contended that if a man were unable to master Latin, Euclid and Algebra, what guarantee would there bo that he was capable of analysing the subtle distinctions arising in the study of common law. How Ai<ist<»tlk HebohotuB, Plato, Pumagoihb, and a few other philosophers of that cahbre, who lived and died before Mr Euclid’s advent was ever dreamt ot, managed to establish themselves in the history of the world, the hon. member did not go on to state. It was also contended by the opponents of the Bill that any alteration in the exis'ing law would work an injustice to those persons who had served articles prior to being admitted Macauley says somewhere that many people could be found who would object to the law of gravitation if it interfered with their private interests. Sir George Gbey's reply to his opponents was vigorous, and worthy of “ the did man eloquent To the as sertion made by the Minister of Jus tice that the examination in general knowledge was quite of an elementary character, Sir Geobge was fearlessly prepared to stake his existence thai the hon. gentleman himself could not now pass the examination. All that may be perfectly true ; and for our own part, we are inclined to believe that Sir George Grey would much more prefer criticising Major Atkinson's financial statement than learning by rote the 47th proposition. This, however, is a long way from proving that examinations in general knowledge are unnecessary. That only thoroughly educated persons should be admitted into the leijal profession, no one should gainsay ; and what we apprehend is the objectionable character in the present Law Practitioners’ Act, is not so much the examination in general knowledge, as the particular form the examination assumes. The examination is of such a character as to practically exclude persons settled in manhood’s years from taking up the study of the law, without having recourse to the same training necessary for lads of twelve or fourteen when learning their Latin grammar. How many educated men are there who, speaking of course

their own language grammatically, would experience much difficulty if they were called upon to parse and ■analyze its sentences. A man may possess a thoroughly cultivated mind, be conversant with hal£-a dozen of languages, be deeply read in the laws of England and the colony—have, in fact, devoted his whole lifetime to the developmen' of his intellectual faculties, and yet he absolutely shut out from competing for admission into the ranks of the legal profession if he were to fail in passing an "elementary examination" which nine out of every ten boys of fifteen or sixteen, At anv decent educational academy, should pass with the greatest ease. This does not appear to be a proper condition of things ; yet it nevertheless exists, and in all probability will continue to exist, until such reforms as an elective Upper House and others of that type become established facts. An amendment in the present law seems necessary, though its precise shape we do not at present take upon ourselves io determine. As to the profession being overdone, it is so already, and gentle homeepathic treatment might do good. *’ As a practical profession," says Junius in one of his celebrated letters to Lord Chief Justice Mansfield, “the study of the law requires but a moderate portion of abilities The learning of the pleader is usually upon a level with his integrity. The indiscriminate defence of right and wrong contracts the understanding, while it corrupts the heart. Subtlety is soon mistaken for wisdom, and impunity for virtue. If there be any instances upon record, as some there are undoubtedly, of genius and morality united in a lawyer, they are distinguished by their singularity, and operate as exceptions.” Have the times and the manners changed since those words were first written ? If not, is there not other reformation demanded in that profession than giving increased facilities to swell its ranks ? Sir Geobge Gbey should include in his Bill a purification clause to simplify the expulsion of men whose conduct has rendered them unfit to be any longer members of what should be one of the must honorable callings.