The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-06 00:00:00

THE INNS OF COURT AND THE BAR.

TO THE EDITOR OT THE SUN.

Stu,—The public is much concerned in the subject of
your article on Calls to the Bar in your journal of yesterday,
and should be much obliged to you for it; but the reform
required is not confined to calls to the Bar. It should be
extended to the Bar itself—indeed, an examination test,
without any reform of the Bar, would be unsatisfactory,
because it would not materially, or perhaps rot at all,
benefit the suitor. It may be asked—what is a barrister P
He is an undefinable gentleman. We know what an archi-
tect is as contradiatinguished from a builder; but no one
knows what a barrister is as contradiatinguished from a
solicitor. Eut though a barrister cannot be defined, his
privileges are well known. He is by courtesy entitled to
be called " learned," though he undergoes no examination
rhatsver as a condition precedent to his having that title.
He is by courtesy heard by the judges, who silence all other
agents of the suitor. Hence he possesses a monopoly in
the Forum. What then is the Bar I It is a fraternity
supported by monopoly ; and upon what title is this mono-
pcAy founded ?—a verbal ceremony—which is as delusive as
the tricks of a conjuror. In short, a call to the Bar is a
proceeding founded on an imaginary title to learning—
which, however, confers civil privileges, as if an examina-
tion test, entitling the candidate to real learning, had been
gone through. The truth is that the Bar is governed
by favouritism. It has its origin in favouritism ;
and, from the inception to the end of his profession
The barrister is a monopolist. This is the reason why the
Bar tolerates the infamously unjust system of promotion, of
one barrister over another, and which originated in usur-
pation by the Crown over the long-established rights of the
Bar, and which since has been continued, and still exists, by
usurpation, to the great detriment of the Bar and the suitor.
The Crown, without any examination, without any test of
merit, without any public services, raises one barrister over
his brethren, and gives him advantages of years of exist-
ence through which he has not lived—which practically
creates within the Bar itself another monopoly—an inner
monopoly of oral or audience business in court. Under
this system many a barrister has had his professional wel-

fare unjustly destroyed, for it operates in the majority of
cases with equal detriment both to the barrister advanced
and to the barrister passed over : to the former, because it
very frequently, indeed, causes him to be unemployed, since
the qualifications for oral business do not exist in him ; and
to the barrister passed over, because he may possess those
qualities, and yet, by his non-advancement, cannat avail
himselt of them. To the suitor it is worse than injurious,

it is a grievous public injustice ; for in the taxation of cost■
a far larger fee is allowed in faveiur of the favoured mem-
bers of this inner monopoly or inner Bar—the gentlemen
with Q.C. to their names—than they would e7er gain under
a system of free and honourable competition,
What then is required ? The answer is obvious, First,
A severe and learned examination, so that the public, before
a man becomes entitled to the privileges of a barrister, should
have some seourity that ho deserves the title of "learned
gentleman."
Secondly, A removal of the division which exists between
the Inner and the Outee Bar—the Crown in no way inter-
fering so as to favour one barrister in preference to another ;
—in short, free competition at the Bar.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
YERITAS,
London, May, 1864,

Without pledging ourselves thereby to any coin-
cidence of opinion with " Veritae" in his demand
for the abolition of the dignity of Queen's
Counsel, we think it but fair to give our corre-
spondent a hearing, and therefore ptblish his
letter unabridged.—ED. Sun 3