XML | Preceding document | Next document | Cite this document

Despatch to London
Kennedy, Arthur to Cardwell, Edward 14 July 1864, CO 305:22, no. 8115, 363.

Abstract
Despatch to London. Minutes (6), Enclosures (untranscribed) (2), Other documents (1).
Kennedy forwards an Act respecting Barristers and Attorneys at Law which he supports but has withheld his assent, on advice of the Attorney General, until Kennedy receives a higher opinion. Rogers minutes his observation that the Act may be the result of a controversy in which a Canadian attorney [and] a Scotch writer or both took part. Rogers muses that There is more than meets the eye in all this. Cardwell instructs the office to send the Act to the law officers for their review.
No. 46, Legislative
14th July 1864
Sir
I have the honor to submit an Act respecting Barristers and Attorneys at Law passed by the Legislature of this Colony on which I have reserved my Assent in consequence of the advice of the Attorney General whose observations on this Act I enclose.
This Act passed both branches of the Legislature, and my individualopinionManuscript image opinion is in favour of its becoming Law.
I do not feel justified in setting aside the advice of the Attorney General without a higher opinion which I have no means of obtaining here.
I would therefore beg that I may be aided by the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown as to whether they think Mr Attorney General Carey's objections are sufficiently weighty to justify me in refusing assent to this Bill.
IManuscript image
I would beg for this opinion at as early a period as possible.
I have the honor to be
Sir,
Your most obedient Servant
A.E. Kennedy
Governor
Minutes by CO staff
Manuscript image
Sir F. Rogers
ABd 31 Augt
Reserved for Sir F. Rogers
TFE 1/9
Is not this the result of a controversy in which a Canadian attorney a Scotch writer or both took part? If so I shd like to see the previous papers.
FR
Papers annexed.
ABd 19 Sep
There is more than meets the eye in all this. There has been an unaccountable opposition to the free admission of lawyers to practice at the V.C.I. Bar—and the minute of the Atty Genl suggests the idea that he wishes to keep that practice to himself & a few friends.
I would answer that the Govr will do well to assent to this Act, if it is still competent to him to do so. But that Mr C so far agrees with the Atty Genl as to think that the Law ought to invest the Supreme Court or some other authority with the power [of] excluding barristers or solicitors from practice in case of any disgraceful conduct.
Or shd it be referred (as the Govr suggests) to the Law Offrs of the Crown?
FR 20/9
To Law Officers.
EC 27
Documents enclosed with the main document (not transcribed)
Manuscript image
"An Act respecting Barristers and Attorneys at Law," passed by the Legislative Assembly 2 November 1863 and by the Legislative Council 6 April 1864 (seven pages).
Manuscript image
Extract, Attorney General George Hunter Cary to [Kennedy], 7 July 1864, objecting to the provisions of the act as being "loose and unguarded," with explanation.
Other documents included in the file
Manuscript image
Rogers to Attorney General and Solicitor General, 5 October 1864, forwarding copies of the despatch and enclosures, and asking them to give the matter their joint consideration and report their opinions.