Untitled

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2624, 18 August 1881, Page 2

That stronghold of vested interests, the Legislative Council, has thrown out the Law Practitioners Bill by a majority of twenty to six. One can hardly think that the members of the Upper House are satisfied with the existing state of legal matters. If they are, nobody else, save the lawyers themselves, is of the same opinion. There is no doubt that Sir George Grey’s Bill went too far at one stride. It was a great deal too radical. In general, reforms to be effectual and permanent must be gradual. The Law Practitioners Bill, if it had been passed in the shape introduced, would have thrown open the profession to all who had a mere smattering of law. The educational test was omitted. We never hoped nor wished to see the measure passed in its original crude state. Credit must be given to the legal profession for their reasonable and well considered opposition to the Bill. All they contended for was that the intellectual standard of the profession should not be lowered by the abolition of the general knowledge examination. But the Legislative Council went farther in their oppisiiion than those most deeply interested. The Council virtually by a big majority refused to consider any amendment to the Bill. It emanated from the greatest enemy of the Upper House, and consequently should be knocked on the head without further ceremony. That one bad turn deserves another is a line of action often pursued by the nominated branch of the Legislature. The Council by refusing to go into Committee on the Law Practitioners Bill evinced great animus. There are

not a hundred intelligent men outside the legal profession from Invercargill to Auckland who do not believe that amendment is as necessary in the practice of the profession as in the law itself. The Law Practitioners Bill was treated as a party question. A glance at the division list will show that. All the most pronounced political and private enemies of Sir George Grey followed the Attorney-General into the lobby against the Bill. The Government, however, had not treated it as a party question. Members of the Ministry held different views on the subject. In the Lower House, the Premier spoke in favor of the Bill, in the Council Mr Whitaker was the principal speaker against it. However, in the eyes of Legislative Councillors Sir George Grey is an incarnation of the vile democracy of the colony, and all efforts at radical reform from such a source must be crushed at once. It is a common argument of the Conservatives and their organs in the Press that there are no two distinct political parties in this colony. The argument is partially true. Local considerations too often obliterate lines of party in the House of' Representatives ; but the Legislative Council is a highly Conservative body. No Liberal measure ever passed the Upper House without being strongly backed by the pressure of public opinion. The Conservative colors of the Council have never been lowered when they could be kept aloft with safety. The members of the Council are perfectly well aware that by the mass of colonists a nominated legislative body is regarded as an anomaly in a free country, and that the existence of the Council depends upon its good behaviour. The Law Practitioners Bill was a measure which did not awaken the public interest so much as should have been the case. The Council, therefore, rejected it with safety. A double object was accomplished. Whilst continuing the existence of a monopoly, a slap was given to Sir George Grey. In the course of the debate it was stated that the Chief Justice and Mr Travers, one of the ablest lawyers in the colony,were in favor of the principle of the Bill. But the opinions of two such able experts went for nought with the Council. Captain Fraser ami Dr Grace expressed an opinion that the lawyers’ monopoly was a most useful one to the State. No doubt the bulk of Legislative Councillors hold the same opinion with regard to other monopolies.