The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-16 00:00:00

SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JUNE 16, 1870.

proper, but novi homines, upstarts, purchasers
, under the Encumbered Estates Court. It
is true that the Irish population has per-
suaded itself that it wants a change. The
landlord, howevey, is in general such a good sort of
person that he ought to be left to the exercise of his
own high moral faculties, and interfered with as
little as possible. The tenant is regarded by the
Duke in a very different light. He objects to com-
pensation for eviction, because the owner can-
not under such a condition turn out an
unsuitable occupant without loss. It is quite
possible that a tenant may be "a bad farmer, an im-
moral man, and a pest to the country," or "the
greatest blackguard in the whole country ;" yet
he cannot be evicted without a heavy fine. It never
occurs to the Duke of RICHMOND that the same argu-
ment applies to the landlords. The Conservative
leader desires to protect the landlord against an ex-
ceptionally bad tenant; he never imagines that
the tenant needs protection against an exceptionally
bad landlord. He is apparently unable to conceive
of such a thing. Such, however, is the mainspring
of this, and, we may add, of all legis-
lation. It is the nature of laws that they
are directed against exceptions. In general, the
Irish landlords do their duty; but some flagrantly
violate it, and it is to remedy the state of insecurity
brought about by such as these that the Govern-
ment measure is designed. No good landlord can
suffer from the bill. If he does not capriciously
evict, he is safe. If he has good cause for dis-
turbing his tenant, the compensation clauses provide
that he escapes all payment. The " blackguards "
and " pests " into whose clutches the Duke of RICH-
MOND fears the poor helpless landlord will fall, are
specially guarded against. The third clause stipu-
lates that if a tenant be arbitrarily expelled from his
holding, a sum of money must be paid. If there be
any just reason for expulsion, if the occupier
be a " pest " or a " blackguard," nothing need be
paid.
The speech of the Marquis of SALISBURY, though
brief, was to the point. The hope of the Conserva-
tive party is Liberal enough to believe in small pro-
perties. He is convinced that if there had
been more peasant proprietors, there would
have been no necessity for legislative inter-
ference. Hence he approves of Mr. BRIGHT'S plan
of lending money to occupiers whose landlords are
willing to sell—quite regardless of the consequences
which may flow from such a precedent. Perhaps,
however, this dangez is not great, for there is no con-
sistency inParliamentary legislation. There is very little
difference between lending money to Irish tenants to
become proprietors, and lending money to English
workmen to emigrate, except, perhaps, that the
latter need it more. Yet Parliament consents
to the one almost without discussion, and
refuses the other altogether. Loans to tenants will
no doubt be very serviceable in every way, and there-
fore the principle may be conceded ; but it is certainly
much more " revolutionary " than the third
clause to which the Marquis of SALISBURY so
strongly objects. In providing that the tenant
who is expelled without cause shall be remunerated,
the Legislature merely stipulates that the landlord
shall not take unfair advantage of a bargain which
is actually made—a less serious step than
assisting the occupier to purchase some,.
thing that does not belong to him. The
third clause is the key-stone of the measure. The
Ministry will commit a grievous error if they allow
the Marquis of SALISBURY, or the whole House of
Lords, to disturb it. But of such a result there is no
fear.

Mn. WALTER BAGEHOT has written in the current
number of the Fortnightly Review an article which
should be read by all lawyers and all clients. In it
he asks and answers the question, " Bad lawyers or
good ?"—a question of no small importance to a very
large number of persons. Undoubtedly the
answer must be " bad," so far as concerns
the great majority of present lawyers. Legal
education is one of the most marvellous features
of social life in England. The Inns of Court are
little better than dining clubs, and, save that any
gross breaches of professional etiquette are brought
before them, they have scarcely more influence on
the legal profession than the Jockey Club. They do
not really educate, they examine only in name, they
simply absorb £57,000 a-year without returning it.
As Mr. BAGEHOT says, " A. greater abuse than
the Inns of Court, or so great an
abuse, probably does not now exist in England.
They could only be endured in a country tenacious of
ancient things, even the most lifeless. They figure
in legal education, not because of their efficiency,
but because of their 'size." We have said that they
do not really educate. Until the last twenty years
they did not even profess to do so. At the
present time there are lectures given at the
Inns, and examinations are held. But the
grossly absurd arrangement prevails that those
who attend the lectures need not be ex-
amined, and those who are examined need not
have attended the lectures. A. man who desires to
master hie profession goes to the chambers of a con-
veyancer, special pleader, and an equity draftsman.
But he is not called to the bar by virtue of this, or
because he has profited by it. Moreover, "reading
law " with a barrister is not, strictly speaking, reading
at all. The barrister does not instruct the student,
does not expound any text book. A heap of papers
is set before the student, and he is expected to pre-
pare the document for which the papers were sent.
He is told to "write wide," so as to give the barrister
room to make any number of corrections, and the stu-
dent must find out for himself why they are made. In
a special pleader's office there is an opportunity of pick-
ing up much valuable information, but it is disjointed
and patchy. There is a want of correlativeness,
an absence of principle. This deficiency is apparent
in lamentable ways subsequently. For want of
definite principles litigation becomes a lottery, the
law becomes uncertain to a degree " glorious " for
those who thrive by it, but ruinous to others. The
barrister who has trusted entirely to prece-
dents, and has always looked upon principles
with suspicion, is not likely to trouble him-
self with principles when he becomes a judge.
Thus the judgment of the bench is too often
a solemn toss-up, and if the decision should depend
upon several judges, there is no possibility of fore-
telling on which side the majority will be. To un-
certainty we must add downright ignorance in the
case of minor judicial officials. There are a large
number of posts tenable only by barristers, yet these
men may be, and too often are, absolutely ignorant of
all law. Thus we fall into the absurdity of confining
offices to a class because it is supposed to be compe-
tent, and yet take no care that this class is com-
petent.
The first reform is abundantly indicated by what
we have said. There must be a proper legal
education, and a proper examination to test
the knowledge of the student. The next reform
is to abolish the distinction between barrister and
attorney. It acts most unfairly to the client. The
client goes to his attorney for advice; the attorney,
not caring to have the responsibility of giving advice,
takes counsel's opinion. Not a few counsel, knowing
that they depend upon the favour of the attorney,
and suspecting that he has a weakness for costs,
recommend proceedings as a matter of course. The
client has no means of ascertaining the counsel's
reasons. It is not etiquette for the first to call upon

the second and cross-question him. If the client
loses his cause he has no remedy. It is useless for
him to say " You advised me to sue. You told me I
was going to win. I did sue, and yet you see I have
lost." As Mr. BAGEHOT positively says, " The
man you can scold did not advise you ; and the man
who did advise you you cannot scold." There is no
such arbitrary distinction between adviser and advo-
cate on the Continent or in the rest of the
world. It is impossible to imagine any
reason satisfactory to the suitor why it
should prevail in England. In fact we have
already abolished it in our minor courts. An
attorney may plead in a county court or a
Court of Bankruptcy. There is no good cause why he
should not plead at Westminster or in Lincoln's Inn.
One result would be that good lawyers,without pecuni-
ary resources sufficient to enable them to sustain ten
years' enforced idleness, would be able to practice as
attorneys until they had established themselves to
act as advocates. Thus the profession, no
less than the public, would benefit by this
reform. Nevertheless the present system has so many
advantages for the established lawyers, and does to
such a large extent increase their earnings, that it is
not probable the desired change will be speedily
brought about. Lawyers are also law-makers, and
experience has shewn how very slow they are to
forward legislation which, however desirable it may
be for the public good, inflicts pecuniary loss upon
themselves.

TOPICS OF THE DAY.

is again under the consideration of the Souse of
Commons.

THE GRAND JURY LAWS.

When Parliament has finally disposed of the Land
Bill, it will probably be called upon to reconstruct
the grand j ury system of Ireland, a system which
at present is said to materially retard the progress
of the country. Although it is admitted that the
existing grand j urors are a class of men who are
generally intelligent and practical, and who appear
to have an interest in low county rates and their
economical application, still it is considered a serious
abuse that they should be allowed to retain the
power of disposing of vast and unlimited sums of
money. The fiating of the presentments
is the only check on • such proceedings ;
and although it is salutary, it is highly inefficient.
Over a million of money is raised in Ireland by grand
juries, and it is thought very unreasonable that they
should exercise an almost unlimited control over the
expenditure of this sum. The chief evil of the sys-
tem, however, is that grand jurors are actually
self-elected men. In Ireland it is argued that
schemes of local government conducted on the prin-
ciple of representation are the most successful, n o
only in being the best mode of educating the rural
population, but also of economically applying the
county rate. It is to be hoped that when the agi-
tation which is now threatened on the subject
in the sister island is made manifest, that
a reform in the whole system of local administra-
tion over the United Kingdom will also be demanded.
It is absurd and discreditable to say that England
must wait till her farmers are better educated than
they are. A class of men who have raised agriculture
to its present flourishing condition, and who have mul-
tiplied the agricultural resources of the country by
combining science with practice, who have spared no
expense in making improvements in every way
possible, can hardly be considered incompetent to
manage their own local affairs in the proper and
most honourable way.