Images de page
PDF
ePub

for the promotion of pet schemes of his own. That arbiter of the order of public business and eminent whipper-in, or, as some one has irreverently called him, whipper-snapper of the Whigs, Mr. Glyn, it appears, is besides not over-disposed to give facilities for the furtherance of Caledonian interests. It was with great difficulty that days could be got last Session even for pushing through the Scotch Education Bill; and it is upon the cards that, mainly from the same cause, some of the Bills introduced this Session by the Lord Advocate may not become law. Scotch business seems to be postponed to everything else, and only to be taken up at or about midnight, so that, from a recent rule of the House, any member who is willing to allow himself to act the part of a marplot on behalf of the opponents of any particular measure, as Sir Graham Montgomery, and afterwards Mr. M'Lagan, very simply permitted themselves to become last year with regard to the Law Agents Bill, has only to put a hostile notice on the paper, and the doomed measure cannot upon any consideration be taken up after twelve o'clock at night.

If a thoroughly capable man like Mr. Young is thus prevented from doing what everybody knows he would willingly do if he could, it is surely time that something should be done to bring about a change in the mode by which legislation for Scotland is now conducted. Why, we are of less account than Lancashire; but, if we complain, we are facetiously told by our Cockney friends that we ought to be thankful that we are not still building herring and haddock smacks and heatherthatched bothies, instead of ocean-going steamers and houses with columns of Aberdeen granite. Englishmen seem to preserve the Scotch moors to keep themselves in sport, and the Scotch vote to keep themselves in office, while we-why we have to scramble for the crumbs which fall from the rich man's table, as the cloth is being removed and the chief guests are taking their hats to leave the House during the small hours of the morning. Is that a position worthy of a country which once had a king, a nobility and a parliament of its own? But while it is just to Mr. Young to place fairly before the country the difficulties of the situation, not merely for his justification, but in order that they may be as speedily as possible removed, by dignified remonstrances on the part of the people of Scotland, when they have the opportunity of returning men as their representatives upon whom they can rely to see that their wishes are carried out, it is also proper to state that there is one important measure of Law Reform with regard to the prosecution of which Mr. Young will not have precisely the same apology to plead, should he fail in carrying it through this Session. That measure is the Law Agents Bill.

No Lord Advocate probably had ever greater encouragement to proceed with a Bill than Mr. Young has had to go on with his measure for placing solicitors in Scotland upon a proper footing. He had to back him up the verdict of a Royal Commission unanimously condemning the state of matters which it was sought to change, and affirming at the same time the principle which it was desirable to establish in its stead. And what was the state of matters thus unanimously condemned? Why, it was a system of law agency by which, in some of the Sheriff Courts of this country, the Lord Advocate himself, with all his legal learning and brilliant qualifications, could be excluded as a local practitioner unless he had served an apprenticeship with a member of the particular Sheriff Court the procurators of which claimed the exclusive privilege of practising before it. It was a species of monopoly or trades union of the most objectionable description, in defence of which not one, even of the privileged themselves, has yet ventured to stand up. Indeed it is difficult to say whether those who enjoy its unjust benefits, or those who suffer from its radically unjust exclusiveness, are most astonished at the apathy with which a professedly Liberal Government appears to look on its continued existence. It is upwards of three years since the Royal Commission passed sentence of death upon this monster, but St. George has not succeeded yet in slaying the dragon. The lucky moment has not probably arrived. "Quid datur a divis felici optatius horâ?”

Memorials numerously signed by procurators throughout Scotland were presented to the Lord Advocate, praying him to introduce a Bill to carry out the recommendations of the Commission. Deputations went to Edinburgh to press the matter upon him, and to the credit, let it be said, of Mr. Gordon, Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, he most handsomely did, which perhaps few ex-Lord Advocates in his position would have done-he accompanied a deputation of law agents to wait upon Mr. Young, and urged the expediency of introducing a Bill upon the subject. It is equally creditable to the Lord Advocate that, moved by the strong desire thus manifested, he brought in a Bill last Session, and succeeded even in getting it through Committee in the House of Commans. Whether that Bill was exactly to his own mind or not is a matter which it is needless to discuss here, but it was not fortunate enough, with all the breezes blowing in its favour, to get out of the harbour of the Commons. It was wrecked, alas! while on the point of crossing the bar. That Bill was however supported by petitions from all parts of Scotland. It is believed that there was only one insignificant petition presented against it, from some extremely benighted part of Ayrshire. Since last Session the Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow, and the Writers to the Signet and Solicitors before the Supreme Courts, have had the matter under consideration, and, subject to some very reasonable modifications, they have all, it is understood, given in their adherence to the principle of the proposed measure. In addition, there are unmistakeable signs of a general wish for legislation on the subject, as shown by the almost weekly appearance of numerous petitions on the table of the House of Commons praying for the re-introduction of the Bill.

It is in circumstances like these that the Lord Advocate has at last brought in his new Bill, which, so far as can yet be ascertained, has given general satisfaction to the profession-the general Council of Procurators being however a conspicuous exception. The Bill does not directly interfere with that body, but under it their occupation would, like that of Othello, undoubtedly be gone. The gentlemen composing that council are consequently determined to oppose the Bill mordicus, whether by so doing they will be in harmony with the feelings of the profession or not. It is to be hoped, however, that upon fuller consideration they may submit gracefully to the inauguration of an order of things which will be undeniably a great benefit to the country at large. At all events the course of the Lord Advocate is clear. Having satisfied himself of the thorough fairness of his measure, he ought, on public and professional grounds, not to speak of the duty which he owes to himself, to stand by his Bill. No good, but the very contrary, can result from allowing this question to remain longer an open one, and with a powerful Government at his back, there is no reason in the world why the Lord Advocate should not settle it now. A. Μ.

The Month.

Popular Vilification of the Bar. - Many who wish for legal and professional reforms in no narrow or sectarian spirit, have lately been led to hope that the Glasgow Herald was taking up that high and unprovincial position with regard to legal questions which the Scotsman declines, and to which no other newspaper even thinks of aspiring. Such expectations received a severe shock from an article on the qualification clause of the Stipendiary Magistrates' Bill, in the Herald of May 1, not because the writer objected to the limitation of the proposed new judicial office to the members of the Faculty of Advocates for we have formerly expressed our opinion that that limitation is inexpedient-but because the style and tone of the article, smart as it was, were not such as were to be expected in the Herald. The manner was precisely that of a sharp third-class attorney, himself an aspirant to the office of a sheriff or a stipendiary magistrate, but an aspirant who, knowing that he had no case, followed the time-honoured maxim of his order, and abused his rivals. It is true that the suspicion which this involves is entirely out of place in reference to the Glasgow Herald, but it is to be regretted that any ground should be given for such an imagination.

It is not our purpose to point out the numerous inaccuraciesor rather misrepresentations with which that article was filled; but rather to remonstrate against the spirit with which a certain small class of people think it becoming to write and speak of the Scotch Bar. To prove that the office of stipendiary magistrate should not be confined to the Bar, it was not necessary to vilify that branch of the profession. The writer has gone further than he needed to do to support his conclusion; for if what he says about the capacity of Scotch advocates have a grain of truth in it, not only should no legal appointments be confined to advocates, but advocates should be expressly excluded from them, unless indeed they had first served a five years' apprenticeship under a Glasgow agent. We rejoice in the progress and ambition of the other branch of the legal profession, and we are proud of the ability and culture which it sometimes displays; but we must be permitted to say that its members will injure their profession, and the interests of their country, if they, and those who take their cue from them, continue to indulge in this kind of general and undiscriminating vilification of the Bar. We shall not use the stock phrases about the culture and character of the Bar, and the services it has rendered to Scotland, its literature, its law, and all that. Such considerations do not in these times constitute any claim to respect or gratitude, much less to toleration, if any body relying on them has become a cumberer of the ground. But it is not yet proved that the Bar has become useless to the country, or that there ought to be no line drawn between the lawyers who plead before courts and those who are engaged in general business and conveyancing. Not a few indeed of the most sagacious observers, including the ablest both of the local and superior judges of this country, agree in thinking that the experience of America and Glasgow shows that very considerable evils arise from removing the line between the two classes. That does not imply that the line ought not to be more easily crossed than it is now, or that it should be drawn precisely in the same direction as at present-matters which we are prepared to discuss at a more convenient time.

Taking it for granted, then, that there must be, at least in the meantime, a class of advocates, and a class of agents and conveyancers, the writer in the Herald proceeds upon two unwarrantable assumptions. He assumes, in the first place, that there is no sufficient reason why the majority of judicial appointments should be made from the Bar; and in the second place, that their being so made is an injustice to the other branch of the legal profession. These assumptions may be shortly answered without going into detailed argument.

1. The grounds on which the existing practice may be justified are of different degrees of cogency, but together constitute, we submit, a more than sufficient reason. (a) Without denying that in late years the educational standard of all the bodies of agents has been greatly improved, and assuming, if you will, that it is now as high as that required for the Bar, the training of the advocate is different from that of the local practitioner. For two or three years before passing, and for some years afterwards (whether or not he gets practice), he applies his mind to preparation for a different kind of work from that of the law agent. He looks forward to forensic and judicial work alone, he studies for it alone, and he is in constant contact, whether with or without much actual practice, with the best models of forensic and judicial ability and demeanour. These are advantages for the want of which no amount of the rough and ready work of the Sheriff Court can compensate. We have not the slightest hesitation in contradicting the assertion, that Sheriffs taken from among general practitioners will be as good as others; for experience in nine cases out of ten has been proved the reverse.

(b) While the want of this training may sometimes be more than compensated for by special abilities or opportunities, and while we willingly admit that there are some practising agents as well qualified and some better qualified for the office of Sheriff-substitute than the average junior advocates who get such appointments, it must be remembered that such abilities and opportunities procure for those who possess them a far higher remuneration in general business than that which any inferior judicial appointment gives. The result is, that in most cases only second-rate procurators in Sheriff Courts would accept the office of Sheriff as it is now paid, while the special training of the Bar fits comparatively young men for its duties.

(c) It may be added, arguing on the assumption we have made with regard to the two branches of the profession, that to alter the present presumption in favour of the Bar would be to destroy that body altogether, because, as business is now distributed, many men would not come to the Bar unless for the purpose of qualifying themselves for judicial appointments. In France and other countries the Bench is not filled up from the Bar at all, but from lawyers specially trained for it; and if in this country we have sometimes Sheriffs and even judges of the Supreme Court who have little practice at the Bar, it is not therefore to be assumed that they have had no training for judicial work. It will only be carrying the same principle a little further, if in future the higher judges should not always be sought among practising lawyers, but sometimes among the inferior judges, and if such men as Sheriffs Bell or Dickson should at times be removed to the Supreme Court.

It is not a valid objection to these views that local judges must often, under the existing system, be taken from the ranks of the juniors who have had little business. It is an erroneous idea that, because few men obtain a large practice at the Bar, the many who do not are incapable, or even inexperienced. The five or six years of moderate practice which a young advocate obtains before he is translated to a local court, is worth twenty years of the desultory

« PrécédentContinuer »