The Gazette 1967/71

1,000 two Societies collaborate informally in a most valuable way. Is some more formal link, some sharing of the burden of, for instance, the Public Relations work, desirable? A simple change easily effected would be the appointment by the Secretary of State for Scot land of two significant laymen to the Disciplinary Committee. No possible harm could come from such appointments and the public's faith in the discipline of the profession would be restored. No paper on the Future of the Profession would be complete without some discussion of the relationship of Scots and English Law. This may become more of a political issue. There is no doubt that to have a separate legal system without a separate legislature has proved ineffective. Pos sibly Scotland will one day have its own legislative assembly, in which case Scots Law may remain alive and flourish. Without such a separate legis lature it seems that the more important statutes will be United Kingdom ones, such as the Com panies Acts, Finance Acts, and thus most of the modern Law will be common to both countries. It is a difficult period in history to forecast the trend of relations between Scotland and England, but the writer's mind is clear that the benefits of scale which we have referred to earlier in this paper apply just as much to the administration of Law on a U.K. basis as they do to the adminis tration of Legal Partnerships within a city or a major town. A paper on the Future of the Profession must be controversial. No one will agree with everything that is written in this paper. Certain lawyers will agree with nothing in it. The writer doesn't agree with everything in it. But it is written as the basis for a discussion and it may help to point to some of the trends which are going to affect all who practise the Law in Scotland. To be aware of the trends is important, but to adapt practice in anticipation of the trends is more important. That the profession should accept the challenge of change and vigorously adapt itself for the future would surely of itself encourage some greater degree of public confidence in the Law and lawyers. This article is printed by kind permission of the author and the Law Society of Scotland. CRIMINAL JUSTICE BILL 1967 The following memorandum has been sub mitted to the Council by a sub-committee of the Council appointed to consider the provisions of fullt-ime persons. At present the

the Criminal Justice Bill 1967. The members of the sub-committee are Gerald F. Goldberg, Rory O'Connor and Bruce St. J. Blake. Termination of Distinction between Felony and Misdemeanour The Criminal Justice Bill (Section 5) proposes to terminate all distinctions between Felony and Misdemeanour. The Memorandum, which accompanied the Bill, notes that some of the distinctions between felonies and misdemeanours arose from the For feiture Act, 1870 which included forfeiture of "any pension or superannuation allowance pay able from public funds to which" a person con victed was entitled. Nevertheless, the principle of a consequential forfeiture, as a deterrent, is writ ten (Section 54—Disqualification for Grants) into the Bill and, in certain cases (Section 57 persons "eligible for or in receipt of a pension, superannuation allowance, lump sum or gratuity payable out of Public monies") who are con victed of an offence which involved fraud or dis honesty and resulted in loss of Public monies "may, at the discretion of the appropriate autho rity suffer deduction, not exceeding the loss of the Public monies involved". The Bill seems to recognise the conflict between the well-intentioned effect of Section 5 and the retrograde consequent "disqualification" clauses of Section 54 and 57 by giving a discretion to the Court, in the first instance and to "the appropriate authority" in the other. The Court may suspend the application o Section 54 if the Defendant enters into recog nisances as to his future behaviour and, also, by excluding from the purview of the Section certain clearly defined payments under the Health Acts, Mental Treatment Acts, Public Assistance, Pen sions for Services, Monies payable for education or vocational training. We recognise the right of An Dail to create new offences; but on the ques tion of punishment we do not accept the prin ciple that, in addition to its being deterrent and reformative it should, also, be retributive. We, therefore, regard all Sections of the Bill which seek, by way of retribution, to add to any other penalties which the Court may impose, as being contrary to the principles of modern penology and as being likely to bring about grave injustices against individuals and, indeed, to impose an im possible task on Judges. Powers of Arrest, Search, and taking of Finger prints There can be no objection to the provisions of 108