105 / 144
J. J. Lynch 339, H. O'Donnell 327, J. J. Bol-
ger 322, J. R. Quirke 319, M. G. R. Lardner 316,
I. J. Dunne 313, R. A. Macaulay 313, J. J.
Smyth 303, Roger Greene 299, C. G. Stapleton 282,
F. J. W. Barley 279, J. J. Dundon 276, J. P.
Tyrrell 258, with the following as the supple
mental list in case of vacancies : Joseph Barrett,
249, P. C. Moore 245, D. R. Pigot 226.
The President, in moving the adoption of the
Annual Report said :—
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am pleased to have this opportunity of again
addressing you and I am very glad to see you
here to-day. Your presence shows that you take
an active interest in the affairs of the Society,
and the members of the Council are more than
pleased that you should take this interest.
Since our last Half-Yearly Meeting, in May last,
the Council has continued to actively look after
the interests of our profession, and has been very
busy in. that direction.
During the past six months, death has taken a
large number of our profession. These include
Mr. Goodlett Hamill, Mr. Gore-Grimes, Mr. M. C.
Burke, Mr. James J. Dudley, Mr. Charles W.
Russell, Mr. George Crowley, Mr. John J. Beatty,
Mr. Arthur E. Bradley, a former President of this
Society, and a Member of the Council for many
years ; Mr. Charles S. Quinlan, Mrs. Mary Nugent,
Mr. Michael Dorgan, Mr. Francis P. Long, Mr.
Timothy D. McCoy, Mr. George B. Caruth and
Mr. Albert J. O'Donoghue. We deeply regret their
passing; and to their relatives we offer our
sympathy.
During the past year, following the active
efforts of your Council, 126 new members have
joined the Society. This is very satisfactory, but
even yet, our membership is not what it should
be. We should have as members of the Society,
every practising Solicitor, and I look forward to
the day when we shall have this. I ask the mem
bers here to-day, each of them, to do his and her
share to get new members.
As you will see from the Report of the Council,
we have been very busy with matters affecting
the profession and the public. During the year,
we have held seventeen Meetings of the Council,
and about forty Meetings of Committees of the
Council, and the Statutory Committee has held
twelve meetings. All these have been well at
tended by most of the Council Members, despite
existing travelling inconveniences. We can hope
for improved attendances, with less transport
difficulties.
I told you in May last of our efforts to secure
at least a modification of the increased Fees
payable under the Land Registration Fee Order
of 1944. We have been completely unsuccessful
in this. The Committee appointed by the Minister
for Justice to consider the Order, made two
reports to the Minister. The minority report was
signed by Mr. John B. Hamill and myself. This
Report, on reasoned grounds, suggested various
modifications of the fees, but the Minister refused
to accept our views and adopted the report of the
majority of the members of the Committee
appointed, so that the considerably increased
Land Registry Fees are payable. It is surprising
that the Minister did not give more consideration
to the views expressed by Mr. Hamill and myself.
I am still unconvinced that there was any justi
fication for the steep increases in Fees imposed—
and the increased Fees are an imposition—by the
1944 Order. However, I have no doubt that you
will wish to have this matter discussed further
later on.
Early in this year,
the then Minister for
Finance met a Deputation from the Council to
discuss complaints by us on the inadequate
salaries offered to solicitors appointed to certain
State Departments. Whilst our interview was to
some extent successful, we find that the same
scale of salary has been offered for a post which
recently became vacant. The Minister was
communicated with, and we have been informed
that there can be no upward revision of the salary
scale whilst the present—one-sided—stand-still
policy exists. This, we regard as most unsatisfac
tory, and I take this opportunity to protest
against the inadequacy of the salary offered, and
the distinction in salary made by the Minister
between men and women solicitors. A
lower
salary is offered to women solicitors. Why this
should be, I am at a loss to understand. I am
perfectly satisfied that ladies competent enough
to be appointed, should not be penalised because
of their sex. Indeed, I think that, by general
consent and approval, we have long since passed
the age when any such distinction should be
made. The Department wants to obtain the
services of young men of good qualifications and
ability, but it cannot hope to retain them, or in
future, to obtain suitable solicitors, unless they
will be adequately remunerated. Perhaps, here,
I might be permitted to say that the policy of the
Minister for Finance as
to salaries for such
appointments, is in strange contrast with the
policy of the Minister for Justice in regard to
Fees payable by the public to the Land Registry,
which
fees have been
"upwardly
revised."
51