The Gazette 1949-1952

ORDINARY GENERAL MEETING

OF THE SOCIETY

. The President, Mr. William J. Norman,

was in the Chair. The following members o f the

Society signed their names as being present:—Messrs.

Thomas A . O’Reilly and Dermot P. Shaw, Vice-

Presidents ; Messrs. Joseph Barrett, Henry St. John

Blake, Patrick R. Boyd, John Carrigan, Desmond

R. Counahan, Arthur Cox, John R. Halpin, William

S. Hayes, Desmond J . Mayne, Reginald J. Nolan,

Daniel O’Connell, James J. O’Connor, John S.

O’Connor, Patrick F. O’Reilly, James R. Quirke,

James J. Hickey, T. Desmond McLoughlin, Thomas

J. Kenny, Patrick C.. Moore.

The notice convening the meeting was, by per

mission of the meeting, taken as read. The minutes

of the Ordinary General Meeting held on 24th

November, 1949, were adopted and signed by the

Chairman.

The President announced that he nominated the

following members o f the Society to act as scruti

neers for the Ballot for the Council to be held on

16th November, 1950 :—Messrs. John R. Mc.C.

Blakeney, Desmond J . Collins, Thomas Jackson,

Brendan P. McCormack, Roderick J. Tierney.

The Chairman, addressing the meeting, said :—

“ L

adies

and

entlemen

This is the first opportunity which I have had of

addressing you since my election as President o f the

Society, and I wish to welcome you here, and to

assure you that the Council likewise welcome the

opportunity which this meeting affords o f learning

the views and opinions o f the general body o f the

profession at first hand.

Since our last meeting in November, death has

taken its accustomed toll and it is with deep regret

that I mention the deaths of the following members

of the profession :—Charles B. W. Boyle, Frederick

H. Croskerry, John J. Early, James J. Kearns,

Charles T. Kennedy, Robert N. Matheson, Sydney

Mathews, Richard W. Maxwell, Justin C. McKenna,

Gerald J. Molony, J. Cornelius Rutledge, Francis

Shields, James G. Skinner (who was admitted in

1892, and is thought to have been one o f the oldest

practising solicitors), John J. Stanton, Arthur B.

Watson.

As members will have seen from the Annual

Report which was adopted at the General Meeting

in November, the membership o f the Society, now

over 80 per cent, of the number of practising

solicitors, is high and is in fact a considerable

improvement on the pre-war position. Possibly

the regimentation and restrictions due to the Emerg

ency, and the example o f other bodies which set

about organising for their own interests, convinced

a number of those, who required convincing, of the

advantages, indeed necessity, o f organisation in our

profession. The organisation is always here; all

that is required to make it function with the greatest

benefit to the profession is that every solicitor should

become a member. There is little need to stress

the fact that an increase from eighty to one hundred

per cent, organisation would command an influence

and authority much greater in proportion than the

mere increase in numbers involved, and this therefore

our objective. In addressing these remarks to you,

Ladies and Gentlemen, I know very well that I am

preaching to the converted; my object in making

them is to stress the advantages o f urging upon your

apprentices, and upon your fellow practitioners who

may not already be members, wherever you may

practice their duty to the profession and to them

selves of applying for membership o f the Society.

I am sure that you all scanned your neswpapers with

eager anxiety on the evening o f the Budget speech

in the hope that the Minister for Finance would have

seen his way to reducing the almost intolerable

burden of the penal taxation on transfers of land

and house property, whether by way of sale or

voluntary conveyance. My predecessor, Mr. Boyd,

commented forcibly on the subject a year ago in his

speech at this meeting, and indicated that it was a

subject which would continue to engage the active

interest o f the Council. The Council did not relax

their efforts and while the Minister was preparing

his proposals for the Budget a resolution was sub

mitted to him by the Society urging that the 5 per

cent, duty should be reduced, and stressing the

particular hardship which it imposed in the case of

persons looking for houses for residential purposes,

most frequently newly-married couples. When

this new tax—and I say new tax advisedly, because

to my mind, an increase o f 500 per cent, on an exist

ing stamp duty is something unprecedented,—-when

this new tax was first imposed in November, 1947,

a deputation from the Council was informed by

high ranking officials that it was purely social in its

objects, designed to put an end to inflation in land

values, and that the Government were not inter

ested from the viewpoint of revenue. The Council

were, therefore, disappointed with the Budget

statement in so far as it proposed no alteration in

this tax. It is true that the Minister expressed

dislike o f the tax and his intention o f reconsidering

the matter before the Budget o f 1951. The danger

is that an injustice may gain a sham respectability on

account o f age, and that if this duty is allowed to

continue long enough, subsequent protests may be

regarded as mere formalities. For this reason, I