491

A.—s

UNIFORMITY OF COMPANY LAW. Mr. LLOYD GEORGE : Yes, all this is work for the secretariat. I also move the resolution " That it is desirable so far as circumstances permit, to " secure greater uniformity in Company Laws of the Empire and that the " memorandum and analysis prepared on this subject by the Imperial Govern- " ment be commended to the consideration of the various Governments repre- " sented at this Conference." That has been circulated I think. Sir WILFRID LAURIER : That might be expected. CHAIRMAN : Agreed ? I ° i Mr. DEAKIN : Agreed. Dr. SMARTT : Can you not meet us in copyright ? Mr. DEAKIN : I do not see anything objectionable in recommending the copyright proposed, but Sir Wilfrid is not prepared to deal with it. Sir WILFRID LAURIER : Both Sir William Lyne and I have some objection to it. RECIPROCITY AS TO BARRISTERS. CHAIRMAN : There are two small things from New Zealand on the agenda about reciprocity. Sir JOSEPH WARD : 1 want to deal with this question of reciprocity as to barristers and surveyors. I will state the position briefly, Lord Elgin. I want to ask the Conference seriously to consider the fairness of giving effect to what I propose and I will give my reasons for it briefly. Full provision for reciprocity with the United Kingdom exists under the Imperial Act, but it is practically inoperative in the case of New Zealand owing to objections raised by the English Law Society on the ground that in New Zealand the two branches of the profession, barristers and solicitors, are combined and owing to this objection the Order in Council necessary to bring the Act into operation has not been issued. I submit that this objection has no substance. It is not suggested, nor does the Act provide, that in the case of a New Zealand barrister who is admitted in the United Kingdom under the Act he shall be entitled to practise here as a solicitor. I would like to point out that if the Act were brought into operation the balance of advantage would be with the United Kingdom. The number of New Zealand practitioners who would seek admission in England would be very few, and the number who would actually practise in England would be infinitesimal. On the other hand the number"of English barristers who would avail themselves of the Act for the purpose of admission in New Zealand where they would have the right to practise both as barristers and solicitors would presumably be great. It is well known that although the prizes at the English Bar are splendid for those who can win them, the number who succeed is very small compared with the very large number who are barristers only in name. The Colonies would afford an excellent field for these gentlemen, and in such cases the direct advantage would be to them although I freely admit that the Colonies would inevitably gain by obtaining people who would not only be a very estimable addition to the population, but would strengthen and raise the status of the profession in the Colony and keep it in closer touch with the English Bar. Since I have been in - England I have noticed that a further objection has been raised, namely, that in New Zealand women are eligible for

Thirteenth Day. s May I'.MtT. Company Law.

Resolution XV., p. ix.

Reciprocity as to Barristers.