IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 y/. 
 
 // 
 
 ..V Wd. 
 
 
 :A 
 
 w, 
 
 ^^ 
 
 f/^ 
 
 f/- 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 If iM IM 
 
 '- 1^ ill 2.2 
 
 ;. it" mil 2.0 
 
 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 <^ 
 
 /^ 
 
 <:?>J 
 
 
 r> 
 
 
 
 ■/A 
 
 
 ^y^y 
 
 / 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 A^ 
 
 <v 
 
 Sb' 
 
 #■> 
 
 
 \ 
 
 If; 
 
 v.. 
 
 \ 
 
 o^ 
 
 A'-' 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
^ i 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques 
 
 
 \ 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original co' y available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 wvhich may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilme le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a ete possible de se procurer Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-etre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la methods normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couvertura de couleur 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagee 
 
 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagees 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculee 
 
 C Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurees et/ou pelliculees 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Covei lt!e missing/ 
 
 Le ti' « de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g^ographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli^ avac d'autrcs documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 Lareliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long de la marge interieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutees 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans la texte, 
 mais. lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas iii film^es. 
 
 ["7^ Pagoa discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 ' Pages decolorees, tachet^es ou piquees 
 
 y 
 
 ' Pages detached/ 
 Pages detachees 
 
 r~j Showthrough/ 
 
 
 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Qualite in^gale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc . have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure. 
 etc.. cnt ^te film^es i nouveau de facon a 
 obtanir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 D 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplementaires 
 
 This item is filmed at The reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu^ ci-dassous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 26 X 
 
 30X 
 
 — \ — \ I I — \ i \ 
 
 
 1 L/ 1 ! ! ' 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library 
 Acadia University 
 
 L'exemplaire fllmd fut reproduit grflce d la 
 gAn6rosit6 de: 
 
 Harold Camiibell Vaughan Memorial Library 
 Acadia University 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire filmA, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol » (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimte sont filmto en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — »- signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure aro filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre 
 filmds d des taux de reduction diffArents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 A partir 
 de Tangle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
< / 
 
 *. 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 -^ T A 7 
 
 FINDINGS OF COUNCIL, &c., 
 
 lY 
 
 ON COMPLAINT OF 
 
 MR. MEAGHER, Q. C, AND OTHERS. 
 
 •4^ -'■^try "*?y>rTp 
 
 IITIDB 
 
 Complaint. 
 
 Pam 
 ... 2 
 
 Evidence of J. J. Ritchie.. 
 
 " T. Ritchie 
 
 " D. Archibald. 
 
 <i II 
 
 (re-called) 
 
 C. K Craigen 
 E. D. King. .. 
 W. L. Baras.., 
 
 > -f 
 
 Findings of Council, etc ^^•••i-::t/'^''''j'^"''''-^'' 
 
 Recapitulation ' 
 
 Notice and Grounds of Appeal 
 
 ^.. 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 , 4 
 
 . 6 
 . 4 
 . 5 
 .13 
 .13 
 1« 
 .16 
 
 jAa W. DoLEY's Cheap and Expeditious Printing Ofpice, 143 Akotle Stbeet, Halifax 
 
 ■ u 
 
 ^1 
 
 q 
 
 / 
 
COl^FXi A-IISTT . 
 
 To the Council of " The Nova Scotia Barristers' Society" : 
 
 THK COMPLAINT OF THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBERS OF 
 " THE NOVA SCOTIA BARRISTERS' SOCIETY/' 
 
 SHEWETH, 
 
 That Edwin D. Kini,', Q. C, nn.l William L. Barss, <loing business at Halifax as 
 Bairist.Ts and Solicitors, liavf for sonu. tinx' pa.st, and are at the present time, availincr 
 tliiiiiselves of tile s.Tvices of a eiTt'iin Broker or A;^'ent, to wit, one W. H. Ferj,'uson, to 
 procure business, the business of Merchants and others in the city of Halifax bein^^ person- 
 ally solicited by t^'e said Ferguson, and by him placed in the hands of said K\w/k Barss. 
 
 That in soliciting s&id business, said Ferguson represents, by the use of printed 
 cards and othrrwise, that business entrusted to him will b.. conducti'd \vithout fee or reward 
 except a commission on the proceeds in the event of success, and business so obtained is 
 lianded by said Ferguson to said King ii Barss. 
 
 And further, that we have reason to believe and do belit^ve that the said King & 
 Barss allow the said W. H. Ferguson to sue out writs of process and prosecute and deft-nd 
 actions in their name in violation of Section Itj, Chapter 93, R. S,, 4th series. 
 
 We complain of the conduct hereinbefore mentioned as improper and unprofessional, 
 an<l pray that an investigation may be liehl pursuant to the Bye-laws of the Society. 
 
 Dated this isth day of February, 18h5. 
 
 (■Sgd.) JAMES J. RITCHIE, 
 
 (Sgd.) N. H. MEA(JHER, 
 
 (Sgd.) T. RITCHIE. 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 VA6 "^^ 
 
 ■I 
 
 / 
 
 'T1 
 
m 
 
 'I 
 
Invosti^'ation of a Coinplaint vs. Edwin D. King, Q. C, and W. L. Bars.s, E,s(i., made 
 liy N. H. MeagliL-r, J. J. Ritdiie and T. Ritchie EHijrs., Ufore the Council of 
 the N. S. Barrinters' Sfx-iety, at the Barristers' Room, March 9, 1885, 4 p. M. 
 
 TiiESENT; — J. N. Ritchie, Prest. ; R. SEWiwicK, Vice do. ; H. McD. Henuv, W. 
 Graham, C. S. Harkixoton, and B. Russeli,, Council. 
 Mr. J. J. Ritchie and Mr. T. Ritchie, Complainants. 
 Edwin 1). King, Dtfcndant. 
 W. L. Barss, Defendant. 
 
 Complaint read hy the Pre.sident. 10 
 
 Mr. J. J. Ritchie : — Some time since a cause was being tried in Co. Court — Moseley 
 vs. Hall ; plaintiff Wius heing examined ; Cotiiisel for defence interrogated him as to 
 whom he gave account to be collected ; plaintiff replied that he gave account to Ferguson 
 to be collected, and that he had not seen Mr. King about it until morning of trial. Mr. 
 King then rose in his place at the Bar and stated that he admitted that the suit in question 
 had come to his hands by means of a Broker (referring to Mr. Ferguson). I have been 
 informed liy Mr. V. F. Farrell that Mr. Fergu.son offered to collect an account for him from 
 one Sprague, and that Ferguson took the account from him on the expres-s understanding 
 that there .should be no charge against Farrell unless debt was collected. If the debt was 
 collected, the charge would be 5 per cent. Sprague was out of the Province (I think). 20 
 Farrell further stated that Ferguson told him to go to King & Barss's office, which he did. 
 Mr. King in his office administered an oath to Mr. Farrell, and (luestioned him as to the 
 case. Shortly after, Ferguson came to F'arrell's shop and told him he must have $10 to 
 pay for the deposition — that it would be returned to him whether the claim was collected 
 or not. Mr. Farrell also stated that Coun.sel in Boston received 820.00, which he was 
 unable to get, and has not been able to get anything. [Mr. Ritchie produces card marked 
 A. which was left at Mr. \V. H. Neal's by Fergu.son ; sub.se(iuentlj- saw a similar one 
 expo.sed in a barber's shop]. I have frecjuently seen writs in the Prothonotary's office in 
 the handwriting of Ferguson signed by King, and .sometimes by King & Bar.ss. The one 
 I saw in the office signed by E. 1). King was in the handwriting of Mr. King (i. e., the sig- 30 
 nature) ; the body of the writ in Fergusovi's handwriting. Tho.se signatures, King& Barss, 
 were in Mr. Barss's handwriting. I .saw Mr. Craigen, who informs me that writs are con- 
 stantl}' brought by Fergu.son signeil by King & Barss or both of them, and that Mr. Fer- 
 gu.son generally attends to all the matters in the Prothonotary's office, including the pay- 
 ing of Prothonotary's fees, entering judgments, etc. I have examined the books in the 
 Sheriff's office. I find writs entered, and in the place in' the book where the Attorneys' 
 names are entered, the name of " King & Barss, per Fergu.son." This morning I asked to 
 whom these matters wen; charged. He told me lo Ferguson, and that the Sheriff had 
 them charged in a separate account from the firm of King & Barss. I have ascertained 
 that Mr. Ferguson buys his own blank writs from the stationers. 40 
 
 Cro.ss-examined by Mr. KlNO: — I did not see the Sheriff's accounts. I did not 
 en<iuire whether King & Bar.ss had authorized the charges to be made in that way. Didn't 
 ascertain whether King & Barss were in any way responsible for the manner in which the 
 Sheriff's books were kept in this behalf. Mr. Craigen diil not give me to understand that 
 
FtT^'Uson ilid any more in tht> Prothonotary's office than an Attorney or an Attorney's clerk 
 woiilil ilo. I can t say tluit Ferj^uson tliti not till up the blank writs which he h«M used, in 
 the otiiee of King & Harss. I remember the Judge used the word Broker. 
 
 (Sgd.) JAMES J. RITCHIE. 
 
 Thos. Ritchie: — On more than one ocuusion I have seen Mi Ferguson come into 
 the I'rotlionotary's othce and i.ssue writs, and pay for them, signed liy King it Har.s^. On 
 oni' occasion I saw him issuing a writ which I believe to be altogether in the handwriting 
 of .Mr. FirgnsoM, signature ami all. Subsecjuently I ilKjuired anil found that the fees up(jn 
 the executions wire charged to Mr. Fergu.son (in the Sheriti"s office). The Sheriff" showeil 
 me an account in tiie name of Fergu.son ; the fees were charged to him and paid liy him. 10 
 
 Cro.ss-exaiiiim-d by Mr. KlNO : — Plaintiff's name in the suit I refer to was Cunard 
 & Co. The writ \va.s i.ssued in the name of Franklyn. 
 
 THOS. RITCHIE. 
 
 1). Archibald, Sheriff", examined by J. J. Ritchie : — I keep an account with King& 
 Bar.ss, and a separate account with Ferguson. [Pn^luces book from Sheriff"s office]. When 
 King &' Barss bring writs, the fees are charged to King & Barss ; when Fergu.son brin"s 
 tiiem, they are either charged to him or paid for by him at the time. [Shows a number of 
 entries where entries are made to Ferguson, others to King & Bar.ss]. I make the charges 
 under instructions from the parties at the time. If Ferguson brought a writ up an<l .said 
 ncjthing, I would charge it to him. In cases of execution where there is an (jrder to arrest, 20 
 I get instructions from Attorneys. When I collect for Ft.'rgu.son, I take receipt King & 
 Barss, per Ferguson. 
 
 Cross-examined by Mr. Kino : — I got no instructions from King & Barss to keep 
 accounts in this way. I continued the accounts as I found them. I did not know from 
 King & Barss that Ferguson was acting any diff'erently for them than Mr. Frye wa« for 
 Meagher, Chisholm & l)rys<lale. I have rendered bills to Fergu.son, al.so to King & Barss. 
 Ferguson told me that he was acting for King & Barss. I got in.structions from clerks in 
 other offices the .same as I got from Ferguson, but I never made charges to the other clerks. 
 Monies collected under executions are credited to King & Bars.s. In ca.ses where there are 
 only fees to charge, where Ferguson brought the writ the charges were ma.le to him ; he 30 
 instructed me to do so. I never told King & Barss that I had separate account against 
 Ferguson. Mr. Fi;rguson almost always paid at the time. Mr. Ferguson pays his account, 
 and King & Barss pay theirs. 
 
 (Sgd. DONALD ARCHIBALD, Sheriff". 
 
 Wednesd.\y, March 11, 1885. 
 
 Present :-- J. N. Ritchie, Prest. ; H. McD. Henry, C. S. Harkington, 
 J. Y. Pavzant, Esqrs. 
 E. D. King and W. L. Barss, Defendants. 
 
 C. E. Craigen, examined by Ferguson : — Ferguson haa been issuing writs since July, 
 ISS.'], after he left Mr. Hunt. Mr. Fergu.son brings writs in his own handwriting, si^nied 
 King and Bar.ss, and sometimes E. D. King. When time is up he enters judgment and 
 
 40 
 
 /■ 
 
r 
 
~f- 
 
 is.sue.s execution. He makefl up costs on slip-i of paper ; generally brings them with him ; 
 .si.iiictiincs lllak»^s them up in our office. King & Bars-s have a Injok ; .some of their casts 
 may lie on slips. He generally pays at the time. He has no account. King & Barss have 
 an account, but generally pay cash. [Pro<iuce.s papers No. 11821, Franklyn vs. Munro ;] 
 iMMly of writ IS in liamiwriting of Ferguson signed by Mr. King, precipe in hanilwriting of 
 Mr. Bar.ss. The cx.cution record and bill of costs are in Fergu-son's handwriting, with 
 exception of signature to execution. Writs issued by him are generally in this way. 
 Moseley vs lii.ll writ is handwriting of Mr. Barss, copy on tile in handwriting of Fergu.son. 
 
 To .Mr. .1. J. Rit«hik:— When F. did not pay at the time, I waited until I .saw him 
 and got the incjney fr')in him, 
 
 Paper B. is in Fer;,'U.son'8 hamlwriting. King & Barss generally pay cash. I think 
 
 invariably that in default ca.ses Fergu.son taxes the bills ; otherwise I lM;lieve in conte.sted 
 
 ca.si's. In tliesr eiuses Kmg >t Barss generally tax the costs. Ferguson may have brought 
 
 some writs to be i.ssued not in his own handwriting. 
 
 (Sgd.) C. E. CRAIGEN. 
 
 Donald Arihibald, Sheriff, recalled: — All the amounts marked with an " X " on 
 pages 80 and l>^z of my ledger were paid by Fergu.son. These writs brought iu by Fer- 
 guson were paid for by him. Hamilton, the Deputy Sheriff, kept the record books the same 
 way as I have done in respect ti the business of King & Barsa and Ferguson. [Mr. J. J. 
 Ritchie offers a copy of a letter addres.sed by him to Messrs. King & Barss, asking them 
 to produce their books of account, etc.] [Mr. Kl.VG states that Mr. Ferguson's name does 
 not appear in their Inxiks tw " a person with whom you have an account." The services 
 rendered by him are paid him at the time they are rendered, or shortly afterwards.] 
 Mr. Ferguson told me that he was an Agent, and that King & Barss were his Attorneys. 
 
 (Sgd.) DONALD ARCHIBALD, Sheriff. 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 Some time in the month of July, 1883, Mr. Ferguson came into the office of King & 
 Bar.ss and said he wanted to have a consultation witli me. He came into my inner office. 
 He .said he was about opening a Collecting Agency in the city — that he had spoken to Mr. 
 Bar.ss on the Dartmouth l)oat with regard to the matter, and Mr. Barss hatl referred him 30 
 to me, and that he had come to consult me about the matter. He first asked me if there 
 was any objection to his establishing an office for the collection of accounts in the city. I 
 told him I ki.ew of no objection so long as his office was properly conducted. He then sJid 
 that probably some of the accounts that might come to his office as such Collector might 
 require to be sued ; he wanted to know if the suits could bo brought by u.s. My answer 
 was that I wa.s willing to sue for any parties who wished us to sue for them, but if he 
 brougb.t any such accounts he must bring the money necessary for all the expenditures in 
 connection with the suits and the consent of the parties for whom the suits were to be 
 brought. I explained to him that we would act only .strictly as Attorneys in the matter, 
 and could not allow him to act for us in anj respect by using our names — that if he 40 
 
 J^ 
 
/ 
 
 1 
 
y^ 
 
 6 
 
 attempted anything of the kind he would be liable to be punished for it and that he would 
 ont TetiTnl, trc^^ble. He then said that he might do some of the wntmg m connect^ 
 with 'the matters. I .said anything of that kind that w.s <^«- ^^ "" .^^^J*^^^!;; ';^;„*t 
 that he xnust have no interest whatever in the suits. I agreed with h,m to employ hun to 
 do writin.r in connection with any suits to be brought, copymgpnnc.paly all matter to 
 I. iTrought to our office, and to go to the Court-House from us. This wa, the fir.t nitimat.on 
 I had from Mr. Ferguson in respect to his business. 
 
 Shortly afterwards he brought .some accounts to our office to be sued. The first case 
 that he brought w.s Smith Bros. vs. James Hemlow. I had not done busines., for SmiUj 
 Bros, before and I .si "d him. when he brought the account if Messrs ^^^^^.^^"^ ,^^ 
 consented to our nx^ting for them. He .said they had. and had promised him all the fees 
 necessary to carry on the u.atter. The writ wa.s i.ssued. The precipe waa prepared at our 
 office the writ w.. signed at our office after it was filled in. and I a^ked him to Uke it 
 up an.l i-ue it. and pay the n.oney which he said he had for that purpose. Shortly after- 
 wards E. G. Snuth cLfe into my office and recognized the transaction, and consulted me 
 with regard to the ca.se. 
 
 The next case I had wa« Farquharson vs. Richey. He brought the account in the 
 same way. Mr. Far^uharson I had been doing business for. for some years Mr. Farquhar- 
 Zcalled afterwards and consulted me about the case. I say the ^me with regard to this 
 wSt and precii... as I said with regard to the Smith case. Mr. Ferguson acted in these 
 Ises Z in'all Les. as our clerk. He did what writing he did as such clerk. He carried 
 the writ, to the Sheriffs and Prothonotary's offices a^ our clerk at our request, and we 
 remunerated him for his services. 
 
 An account of B. A. Smith was also brought in the same way. The first one was 
 against one Lockhart. I asked him for Mr. Smith's authority. He said he ha^ authority 
 ^om him and that Mr. Smith had advanced the funds necessary to pay the disbursements. 
 Mr. Smith a few days afterwards came in and corroborated what Mr. Ferguson had said, 
 and consulted us as his Solicitor in respect to the suit. 
 
 All the business that has been done through our office in connection with accounts 
 brought to us by Mr. Ferguson has l>een done in the way I have described. In every case 
 the plaintiff in the suit has been treated as our client, and in every case, so far ^ I can 
 recollect, has admitted the authority of Mr. Ferguson to bring the account to us for him. 
 the plaintiff. 
 
 In no case has any plaintiff preten.led to us or given us to understand that there 
 was any arrangement made with Ferguson that there was to be no costs unless we were 
 successful I say I never made such an arrangement with any of them at all, and I am 
 informed by Mr.'fiarss, my partner, that he never made such an arrangement. I say on 
 the contrary, that in numerous cases plaintiffs have paid us costs personally or by their 
 clerks in suits where they have recovered nothing. Bell vs. Zwicker is a case in poin . 
 A M Bell was the plaintiff. In a score of cases I myself have prepared the original writ, 
 and I think I did in Bell vs. Zwicker. Bell's case was defended, ami I examine.! one wit- 
 ness de beiie. I a<ivi.setl them that the .suit be withdrawn, and got leave to discontinue it. 
 1 got a UK-mo. of defeiid^M.fs costs on the discontinuance from MacOoy & Morrison, defend- 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
 /.- 
 

 ant's Attorneys, which I sent to Mr. Bell. He immediately returned it and requested me 
 to send him a memo, of all the costs in the .suit. I did so for J39.72, being the amount of 
 costs on Iwth .•side.s, including *10 as the plaintiff's costs, and he sent me back, the same 
 day, his cheque for the amount. The suit was a summary suii in the County Court. The 
 cheque is dated March 9th. 
 
 In the ciwe of E. Morrison vs. Pettipas, in which our costs were paid in full by the 
 plaintiff, who liiinsflf got nothing. I can cite other cases. 
 
 In the ca.se of Franklyn vs. Wi.sdom (Munro & Wisdom), referred to by Mr. T. Ritchie, 
 the account was brought to us by Mr. Fergu.son. It was the first case we had from that firm. 
 I ma-lc the same en.juiries as I did in the earlier cases to which I have already referred, as to 
 Mr. Fergu.son ,s authority to employ us for the plaintiff. He gave me the same answer. Mr. 
 Fergusmi also sUted to me that he had a letter from Mr. Morrow, a member of the firm, 
 re.juesting him to undertake collections for them, and asking him to see him (Mr. Morrow) 
 on the suV.JLct. Shortly afU'rwards I had a ca.se for the .same firm in the City Court— 
 Franklyn vs. Pace. Mr.' Morrow attended the trial at my recpiest. I conducted the suit 
 there in his pre.sence, and a clerk from the firm was examined as a witness by me. 
 Franeklyn et al vs. Byers was a suit I brought for them afterwards. I say the same with 
 regaril to this. Ferguson brought all these claims to our office. 
 
 In all ca.ses Mr. Ferguson acted as the agent of the plaintiff, and not as our agent ; 
 and in all ca.ses, so far as I know, the plaintiff knew that he was bringing the business to 
 us. I never asked Mr. Ferguson to bring any business to us. I never asked Mr. Ferguson 
 to solicit any business for us. 1 never saw the card referred to in the Complaint until I 
 saw it here day before ye.stertlay. I never kne.v of Mr. Ferguson repre.senting to any one 
 that business entrusted to us would be conducted without fee or reward in any event. 
 The plaintiffs for whom writs have been issued never in any instance hinted such a thing 
 to me or in my hearing. I have not done all the business of Mr. Fergu.son. He has asked 
 me to issue writs in cases where I have declined, and I know that afterwards writs in the 
 same cases were i.ssued by other Attorneys in Halifax. He once asked mo to put in a 
 defence for a man named Silver, which I declined doing on the ground that I had in former 
 ca-ses acted for the plaintiff. 
 
 In Mosely vs. Hall, referred to by Mr. J. J. Ritchie, I did not state that Mr. Ferguson 
 was acting as my brok. - in bringing the suit. The Judge on that occasion u.sed the expres- 
 sion " Broker. " I remarked " Yes, that is it," meaning thereby that Ferguson had been 
 acting in the matter as the broker or agent of the plaintiff Although I lia.l not spoken to 
 Mr. Mosely in respect to the suit until that day, my partner had frequently spoken to him 
 about the .suic previously. And Mr. Moseley knew that the caae was in our hands. 
 
 In issuing Executions, the bill of costs was invariably prepared by Ferguson under 
 my instructions where the business was not conteste.l, ami was examined by me or my 
 partner and approved before being permitted to go to the Clerk's oflSce. I didn't allow any 
 papers U) be put on ..le by him, or to be taken to the Sheriff's office, without having care- 
 fully examined them, and he was not permitted to issue writs or put executions in the 
 Sheriff's office without being furnished with the means of paying the costs, either by our 
 firm or usually by the plaintiffs themselves, as I know both from him an.l from the plain- 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
/f 
 
 8 
 
 tiff's themselves, and I was not aware until the investigation that an account was kept be- 
 tween him and the Sheriff. I was assured that everything was paid at the time the writs 
 were handed to the Sheriff, or as soon thereafter as the amount of fees could be ascertained. 
 
 We were never informed by the Prothonotary or the Sheriff that the fees were not paid 
 when the work was done. Our transactions with him as our clerK have been perfectly satis- 
 factory We kept no account with him. Everything was cash, and his name don't appear 
 on our ledger. 
 
 Mr. Ferguson never acted for us in any of the cases where anything was to be done 
 requiring the exercise of professional skill or judgment,. and particularly in all contested suits. 
 Except the issue of tlie writ, we saw U) the work personally, taxing the costs and entering the 
 judgments, issuing the executions, and giving instructions to the Sheriff ourselves. 
 
 As regards business sent to the Country Sheriffs, so far as I know they knew no one 
 in the transaction but King «fe Barss; their bills were invariably sent to us. 
 
 As reganls the Farrell case, I was never asked to undertake it at all. Mr. Ferguson, 
 however, spoke to me about it, and told me that there was a suit in the matter in the United 
 States, and that a commission had been sent down to him to take the evidence. He asked 
 my ailvice as to the propriety of his taking it. I advised him not to take it, as he was acting 
 for Farrell. The commission was afterwards sent to me. I notified Mr. Farrell. He 
 attended twice at our office to give evidence, and cnce to make arrangements for the exami- 
 nation. I charged SIO, and was paid for it. I had nothing else to do with the transaction 
 whatever. 
 
 Even in default cases Mr. Ferguson did not invariably enter the judgments for us. 
 Mr. Barss fnciuently did so. With regard to the purchasing of blank forms, I say that for 
 some time after we commenced doing business with Ferguson the blanks were furnished from 
 our olhce. Subsequently I expressed myself dissatisfied with the forms and drafted a form 
 myself which I gave to Mr. Ferguson, and re(iuested him to get it printed. Messrs. J. L'owes 
 do our printing. I don't know who jiaid for the forms or whether they are yet paid for. Mr. 
 Ferguson provided pens and ink ! 
 
 I am informed by Mr. Ferguson that he referred only to Ins charges for commissions 
 as a collecting agent in the cards sent out by him, and that he so informed the parties when 
 getting their business, and that he had nothing to do with the Solicitor's costs. He told me 
 this in regard to Solicitor's costs before the charge was made. The otiier conversation was 
 since. I think he showed me a arrd with W. H. Ferguson, Collecting Agent, on it. There 
 was nothing like tiie endorsement on the card put in evidence, so far as I know. The 
 cai-d I saw was in a newspai)er. I was put on my guard by remarks made by Mr. V. F. 
 Farrell, and enquired of Ferguson, and was informed by him that he had not represented us 
 otherwise than as plaintifT's Solicitor in the suits we brought. In contested suits, bills of 
 costs were made out by us and taxed by us— all the woik. in fact, except cojnes of writs 
 and filling up original writs in some cases preparatory to their being signed. I made search 
 m the County Clerk's office since Wednesday last. I now say that within the last six 
 months, all original writs examined by me are in the handwriting' and sij^ned l>y either Mr. 
 Barss or myself. Commencing with 1st October last, I examined twenty-.seven writs in 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
§ 
 
 
 I 
 
 9 
 
 the ord..r in which I found thm in County Court clerk's books, and every one of them was 
 in handwriting of myself or Mr. liarss. No writs were signed in blank by Mr. Barss or 
 myself nor si-ned at all without satisfying myself that I have authority of plaintifT to do so. 
 \11 coj'ie.s of writs i.ssued since Oct. 1st last filed in Clerk or ProthonoUiry's office hav« been 
 examined and signed by Mr. Barss or myself (i. e., writs from our office or in our name). As 
 to paiHjr put m evidence in handwriting of Ferguson by Mr. Ritchie, I say the same was copy 
 of a .'aruishee order, brookheld vs. Johnston. It was done by my direction and at my re- 
 quest, and several other paiK;rs were written and copied by him in the same matter in the 
 same way, and he has been paid for them in full, although garnishee proceedings are still 
 pending. Mr. BrnnkHeld, one of the plaintiffs, attended at our office and gave me instructions 
 as to these proceedings. 
 
 In tnswer to Mr. Craham :-I paid Ferguson 65 for what he did in this matter. 
 Mr Fer.nH-m has done considerable work for us as clerk in matters wliere the account was 
 not broiud.t to us by him. We have no agreement with Mr. Ferguson whereby he is bound 
 t„ us or we to Inm. The Court business in our office is under my supervision Mr. Barss 
 has also a kn-wledge of the business brought to us by Ferguson. We have acted as h.s 
 Solictor in several matiers ^personal of his own), and are now so acting. I w,sh to put in 
 papers, DeWolf vs. Cunningham. 
 
 Cross-e.xsinined by J. J. KiTCHiE ;-I have given all the conversation with ^erguson 
 at our tirst interview which relates to charges made against me 
 
 guK.-^TiON :-Were there any additional terms with regard to the way the business 
 was done than iIkj.sc already stated? 
 
 Answer :-ln giving my statement of what occurred between Ferguson and myself, 
 I confined myself to the conversation that related to the charges made against ns, and gave 
 all that related to those charges, so far as I can recollect. There may have been other things 
 spoken of in the same conversation relating to other matters. 
 
 y . :_Did you agree as to the remuneration Ferguson received, at that conversation ? 
 
 \ -Iniiart I did. I had no definite arrangement with Ferguson as to what he 
 should be paid, and he never knew, when he brought an account to our office, what he would 
 receive ui that particular suit. We remunerated hini alt.^gether according to the ^ork done 
 and the circumstances of the case. Mr. Ferguson an<l I. as a rule, an-anged what he should 
 be paid after the work was done. There may be one nr two original affidavits on file in his 
 handwntin... There is one in Brookfield vs. Johnston. The atfidavit was copied from forms 
 „, the .hidKature Act, under my direction muMi. nn.tanJi.. Ferguson's name will appear 
 ,n our cash book only. We do not post cash. I cannot tell what 1 have paid him altogether. 
 I decline to produce cash book, as it contains a great deal of private matter relating to other 
 persons. 
 
 To Mr (IHAIIAM :_Monevs collected by Ferguson by suit did not always pass through 
 our hands. ' The costs were alwa'ys paid iis.. If I wished, 1 might po.ssibly tell how much 
 money 1 have made out of tlie Ferguson l.isiiiess. When we do not get costs rom parties 
 rind to clients. If a c.se occurred where clients refused to pay. we might hold Ferguson 
 
 10 
 
 80 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
10 
 
 I 
 
 liable. It is a question of law as to his liability. My business commenced in July, 1883. 
 The only record of these accounts for costs is our precipe book. I have rendered accounts Uj 
 clients. I kept no copy. I did not post thera. They have been paid. I rememb«r proving 
 Will of John Dooley in solemn form ; Ferguson was there as Mrs. Kelly's friend and agent. 
 He brought Mrs. Kelly to me ; she paid me a foe and retained me. I acted as her proctor 
 throughout ; Mr. Ferguson did nothing, I paid him nothing. Ferguson brought one account 
 from Neal, White & Co. ; I sued it and I got nothing from debtor ; I sent plaintiffs a bill ; I 
 exjiect them to jjay ; have not paid it yet. When bill was first rendered, they sent word that 
 bill was too large, and I learned that one Mr. John M. Chisholm said it was exorbitant. I 
 went U> see Mr. Neal. Saw him. He said it was an exorbitant bill. He had consulted iQ 
 a lawyer about it. I offered Xo tax it with any lawyer. He then questioned my 
 authority to act fijr him, but afterwards admitted that Ferguson had authority to retain 
 us for him. He said, " Send it (the bill) through Ferguson." I did so, and expect Mr. Neal 
 to pay it. There is no case in which I don't expect to get costs. If defendant is not able to 
 pay, I get them from plaintiff. 
 
 Question : — Will you elect now to say whether Ferguson is your clerk or client? 
 
 Answek :— I won't answer. I consider the <iuestion insulting, because I have already 
 explained that he has been at different times both clerk and client, and at other times neither 
 clerk nor client. When he goes to Neal, White & Co. and gets an account and brings it to me, 
 he is neither clerk nor client — he is acting as a collecting agent. I never asked him, em- 20 
 ployed him, or remunerated him for this purpose. He is the agent of the plaintiffs. 
 
 To Mr. Graham : — Ferguson was paid according to the work he did, which was fixed 
 after the work .'as dona. He has a Collecting Agency ; we have nothing to do with it. I 
 am not aware of Mr. ib'erguson going to get accounts. I never said that Ferguson in every 
 case told j>arties that I was going to act and to get their authority. What I did say was that 
 when Mr. Ferguson brought accounts to me from persona for whom I had not previously 
 acted, I invariably asked him if the parties had authorized me to act for them. There may 
 have been eases where Ferguson made up costs him.^lf, but in such cases he did so under the 
 direction of myself or Mr. Barss. I have given him money to issue writs. They may have 
 been contested or otherwise. He has brought defences to our office. He brought the jiarties 30 
 to us. In every such case the party defendant has paid a retainer l)efore we did anything. 
 I gave Ferguson a draft form of writ to take to Bowes & Son for the purpose of having blanks 
 printed from it for our use. If Ferguson pays for them he will do so needlessly, and we will 
 owe him for such payment, as they are for use in our office business. The card (Ferguson's) 
 I saw a year or six months ago. I have some recollection of seeing a card, but I have no 
 recollection of seeing any card with endorsement as on card in evidence. 
 
 To Mr. Harrington : — The only one I recollect seeing was the one published in the 
 newspapers. I may have seen the other, but I do not recollect the endorsement, and am 
 quite sure I never saw the card or would recollect it. 
 
 To Mr Henry : — I did not ask Ferguson to shew me his card. He told me that he 40 
 was to make no charge when he collected nothing, but had made no such arrangement in 
 respect to Court fees and Attorney's costs in any case. He was employed by us as clerk in 
 
11 
 
 matture whica he broujilit Ut us. I would not like to say that he has not so acted in other 
 iiiiitt.r^ uIm). WhLM-e tliere whs dufault and judgment, his rerauueration wouM W iiliout ,^1.50 
 oi- ?_' on an aveni^v. The most I have ever given him in a declaration uuae would be $5 or 
 S^t;. The avenii^e would be about «1 to $2, or even less We were doing the W(,rk oui- 
 s.lvts, but had too much to do, and we employed hiui. The reason why I emiiloy.d him 
 was that I nmst cmidoy somebody, and was willing to give him the jireference. Ferguson 
 lias not the right to do clerk's work iu every case he brings to us. I did ut)t get the work 
 fiom Fergu.iuu on the condition that he was to get something out of it. There was an iiiider- 
 sUndiiig that we slnmld employ him as a clerk if we had oocasi.Ti to employ a clerk. Have 
 .sent out bills for cosU since July 1883, in Ferguson's matters and m conte>ted matters, 
 Mc.\skill and also Neal, White & Co. Ferguson might I* liable to us for these casts on 
 the ground that he is the agent of plainlitfs. It is aiiuesticm of law which I need imt decide. 
 His remuneration does iKjt average more than $8 or $10 a week. I am jiutting this at a high 
 figure; ^<'> pel week would probably l>e nearer the truth. He is a valuable man. He can 
 do drattiiig. We have ikiid him for work wliere he did not bring the client.s ; cannot .say 
 how nuich— vei) little. I have given $'> to $10 since July 1883 probably. If the additional 
 business which he brought to our office had not come, we might not have needed ins services ; 
 but of course I cannot say alwut that. I vould consider him as our clerk for the purjiose of 
 m.ikiug .ittii'avits of service of paf)er3 from our otlice. He is i>aid for work without reference 
 to the result of suit. Mr. Ferguson does work from day U) day ; now and then he comes in 
 and we .settle He brings in a memo. ; I do not usually Uke a receipt from him Have done 
 so, I think, when paying him moneys collected. We do pay him for work when e get 
 nothing Iroiu (iefeiidants. There may be cases where I pay him less on account of getting 
 nothing lioiu defendants. There may be cases where we would feel justilied in not paying 
 huu anything. Wlien he has done some work he comes in, we make up what he is entitled 
 to, and \se p,iy him. In an ordinary default case where he does all the work e.xcept signing 
 tiie wiii, I do not know what we pay him, as it is mi.\ed uji with other work. I think he 
 would get about $1.50. I fre.iuently settled with Ferguson fo. work done by him before the 
 suit was .■settled. In Oct<iber the Judicature Act came lu, which accounts for the large num- 
 ber of original writs in my handwriting ; later ones again are iu his handwriting. I have no 
 agreement ^Mih Fergu.sou by which he was to get a share of the business wliicli he brought ; 
 the co5ts are ours in every Ciise. I have never directly heard that Ferguson solicited business. 
 Mr. Ku.ssell, about six mouths ago, intimated to me that we were dividing costs with Mr. 
 Ferguson. He also charged me with taking clients from him. I then deuied both charges. 
 William Klliol was the client referred to, and he was my client fourteen years ag.i, and is our 
 client now. There have been numbers of cases where he (Fergu.sou) has brought business 
 where he has done nothing, not excepting where we are acting tor plaintill's. I have ^ately, 
 since this charge was made, seen the form of letter which Mr. Ferguson uses. He has on his 
 printed fonu " ?I for lelU;r." 1 have tohl him that ho has no right to charge this SI for 
 letter, or anything for letter, but parties might jiay it to them if tiiey thonsc. We tax on our 
 ilefaull bill, 5i)c. I do not know of his practising as a Solicitor. (Mr. King here tendered a 
 written stat(!ment made by Ferguson, which was refused.) I do not propose to call Mr. 
 Ferguson. I have no power to do so, but I have no objection to his being called. I will try 
 and get a copy of the form of letter he uses, hi default cases, sometimes lie may keep the 
 othce coj.y of the writ. In very many cases we have it and all the papers. We keep all the 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
12 
 
 ,,ra.cu.s. 1 do not th.nk he ha8 the office copy of wnt in a dozen ca>^s since July 1883. I 
 ,. ,.„ know whether or not he kee,« a pnec.pe lH.,k We have a separate pnec.pe l-..k fo 
 co.veu,euce .„ cu.e, hmught to u. hy huu beeause .n such cases we do not get conmnsH.ons 
 on colle.-t>o.,.. We have un othce Ix.y not able to do much wnt.ng. 
 
 (Mr. (inihan. prmluces book fro.u Shentfs office, i QUK.T.ON :-Have you repaid 
 Ferguson all the sums paid by him a.s shewn in this book i 
 
 A^swKU-I thw.k. as a rule, the money was obt^iined by Fer^;u9on from onr clients 
 t„ ...y ,„r the.e .h.lmrsemenU at the tnne of the transaction, or so soon i.s the an>ount was 
 L,!.;uu.ai,.e. In some C..S we have pa.d the money ourselves. All such t--cU.. wer 
 for ca.h. and the charges were made by the Shentt' ..thout "^ ,''"p''':' "'^ "^ :;.7; :^,,;. 
 ,,„„-t ,h,Mk our e..sh book wonld .show .n every insta,.ce where we uul pa.d none> to Vergu 
 i o,,.v theSherXV. Son.a.mes the un.ounts would be m.xed up w.th otb.r n.oncys 
 r U a'week pas.es bnt what we pay money U. Ferguson and he to ns. fhe an.ounts s 
 ,„,, ,;,,„,,, .,,.' ,„elude Sher,tr-s fees. I tlnnk he got the un.uey ,n nearly '^^ -- -" 
 . chent. That w.s the nnderstandmg when we t..k the bus.ness bergus.,n h.s told me 
 :, ,M n.oney from the chents. and the clients have con..b<nuted U I ■ d not know h 
 Shenil w., klepa.g .uch an account. My cash book w.ll not shew tl.-'-"-.'e- o 
 which Mr Ferguson received, because of the manner of making the entries. \V e do not keep 
 ...«h ,n form of dayb,.k. There would be no difficulty m ascert.imng liow accounts sUnd 
 btween .Mr. Ua.Jan.l me. Ferguson got receipts from client, in some ca.ses. 1 don t know 
 wilt Ir he did m every case. In dealing with Country Sherift's. money pas.es through our 
 L m the cuy. through Fergusons hands generally. We did not authorize Hamilton 
 
 vMieii Shenir. to keep any account with Mr. Ferguson, or to treat lum otherwise than as our 
 clerk and I vas not aware until this examination that Mr. Fergusons name appeared on any 
 L: books. The st..tement made by Mr. Craigen in his evidence herein that ' the Lx..u- 
 tion record and Bill of Cost, are in Ferguscns handwriting, with the exception of signature to 
 Execution." m the case of Franklyn vs. Munro. is incorrect. Vhe signature to the record is 
 ,n my liandwriting. and all the papers m the suit were prepared under my personal direction 
 The minutes Uiken by Mr. Foster of my cross-examination are very incorrect. In several 
 „,sunces I am represented as saying just the opposite from what I really did s^vy. and I have 
 found great difficulty in doing myself justice in the corrections made by me. My ^^'^^^-^^^ 
 in r.sir.ct to anu>unt of remuneration paid Ferguson are necessarily imperfect, and so do me 
 great injustice. The matter is not referred to in the charges preferred again, lue and M . 
 Harss by Mr. Meagher and others, and I had no notice that such matters would be eiui ured 
 .mo 1 made the statement, according to the best of my information and belief, in reply t^ 
 ouest.ons addressed to me by members of the Council who desired to enquire into that matter 
 I'l had not then, and have not now, the data for making a complete statement, and believe 
 I have largely overstated the amount of remuneration paid terguson by us. 
 
 (Sgd.) EDWIN IX KING. 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
I 
 
 IS 
 
 r?r.::rrsSH=H=:r:B 
 
 tola me that he w.« gun., to .sUh h.h a Collect on Uftc. ^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ 
 
 eounu he would want to have sued. Jf ^ ^^^ ^^^f^J i „ever re.ne.uber seeing any 
 
 see Mr. K.ng I -nade ^ --"g«7^"^;f;™;;ti h.s card published .u the newspa- 
 such card as the one n. ev.den e. I hav fre luent^ V^ ^ ^^ .^ ^^^.^^^^ 
 
 p.rs. I had nothing to do -^h >ssu:ng card ^^^- ^^^ ^^^^ I ^, 1,^ 
 
 .een.sned. ^^ '--J^l^J^-^^^^^.^r:: ^ pL. I never author.ed 
 
 to bnug a.iy to u.. The .uUance was niau y ^^^ ^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ 
 hun to sign u>y .-.ne or the hrn. s name, or Mr. K ng s name 
 
 .,, ..y without our. nowl^ge^l^v.^^^ ^ ^^^^ ,^^^„ _,^, 
 
 as sUted iu the Complaint, did not authorize .1, i ^^^^^ 
 
 . .very ..e to asW Kerguson, ■• Do client wan u U th s . He ^^^ y^ J^^^^^_ ^^^^ ^^^^^ 
 
 did. In re Mo.eley vs Hall, I >.w Mr Mostly .1 1 ^ ^^^ ^^^ 
 several consulUitiuu.^ with him previous to trial. Ue Knew 
 
 (Sgd.) WILLIAM L BARSS. 
 
 10 
 
 P-iNiDiisros OF ooxjNOix., and Biiisro <fc 
 
 BAI^SS- OOMIWEENXS TMEFlEOlSr. 
 
 RKSOI trios l.X«SEl. AT A MEETING OF THE COUNC.L OK THE BaUKIsTEHS' SoCIETV. ON 
 
 THE 15th day of April instant. 
 
 .g.a,u.. M.».. h. 11 1^' « " u °s hav,„B te™ d.ma.JeJ, »",! ihi. Council living duly 
 ,1„. Couucl p.,n>„.nt u, .1,. "'j''"' .J.^, „ij compkina.t, an.l .!.« saiJ K. I). Ki«g 
 
 proved : — 
 
 , , ,. v«.r 1H8T one W H F.rguson esUblished, on h.« own accuunt and iu an office 
 
 '■ Thi o!n anVncy at Halifax for the colleciou of debu. Hy adverU.e.ueut 
 
 ;;ulll:rcards he represented that he would make no c.iar.e again.t the 
 
 pcrwns employing him unles. successful in collection. 
 
 COMMENT -Finding No. 1 is misleading, and d,.es not state the whoh truth. The 
 
 ploying h.m .uiless successful, referred ^^^J f^^,^ ■^•„„^ .though no 
 
 U< i«y, and in numeroiui cases did pay, Attorne) s oosi..-, au 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
14 
 
 - / 
 
 I 
 
 coUectiuns whatever were mafle. 
 7:1-7; 8: 14-21; 10: 39-41. 
 
 See Evidence, pages 8 : 29 ; 3 : 16-25 ; 6 : 34-43 ; 
 
 2. Previous to the establishment of such Agency, he entered into an agreement with Messrs. 
 
 King ife Barsa by which they were to receive from him all luch accounta a« 
 reiiuired legal process for collection, and he was to h«i employed by them to do 
 certain work in each suit so brought them, and was to receive remuneration 
 therefor in proportion to the amount of work done. 
 
 Comment. — Finding No. 2 is untrue, and is in direct conflict with the evidence. W. 
 H. Fergusun never a;^reed to give "all such accounts as reiiuired legal process for collection" 
 ♦" King & liarss; nor did he agree to give any such accounts to them, nor was he ever asked 
 ,.. required liy King & Barss to do so. King & Barss, on the other hand, did not agree that 
 Mr. Ferguson should do " certiiin work in each suit so brought them," nor were they bound 
 by any agreement or arrangement or understanding to give him work in " each suit " nor in 
 a?ii/ suit so brought them. See Evidence, pages 5: 33-40; 6: 1-6; 7: 26-30; 11: 5-9 
 and 29-31. 
 
 3. .Since such agreement was made, Mr. t'erguson has continuously, with the aid of Messrs. 
 
 King & Barss, been doing Solicitors' work. A large number of wriU have been 
 iisuud in coauection with the Agency in question. In a majority of such cases the 
 whole of the work, from the issue of the writ to the obtaining of judgment and the 
 final collection of the claim, has, with the exception of signing the Solicitor's name 
 to process and the filling up of praecipes, been done by Mr. Ferguson— forms of 
 proceedings having been supplied to him with the coucurreoce of Messrs. King & 
 liarsa. He opened an account with the Sheriff at Halifax, and he was charged 
 like a Solicitor for all services rendered by the Sheriff. The Sheriff paid him 
 moneys collected under execution, and he paid the same to the persons entitled 
 without any reference to the Solicitors on the record. 
 
 Co.MMENT. — Finding No. 3 is untrue and contrary to th^ evidence. The evidence 
 shows that "no such agreement was made" at any time ; that Mr. Ferguson has never "been 
 doing Solicitors' work" or other work than that ordinarily done by a Solicitor's clerk ; that 
 every writ, execution and other process referred to was carefully prcpiired under the direction 
 of and carefully examined by King & Barss before being issued ; and that the majority of 
 writs mentioned are wholly in the handwriting of one of the members of the firm of King & 
 Barss; that all such writs were issued, without reference to "the Agency in iiuestion," directly 
 from the office of King & liarss, who kept office copies of writs, and entered the cases in their 
 pra'cii* book ; that King &, Barss acted in every case as the Solicitors of the plaintiffs and 
 with their knowledge, consent and authority, and in all Ciises before issuing the writ re.iuired 
 evidence of such consent and authority, and that plaintiffs should furnish the money necessary 
 for disbursements ; that all the work done by Mr. Ferguson in such cases was performed by 
 him at the n'^ue^l of King & Barss and as their clerk, and that while su(>h blank forms were 
 provided to Mr. Ferguson by King & Ikrgs as their work required, no icrits or other ;)(V)cm 
 aiyiicl in blank were ever so provided ; that the Sheriff at Halifax always in cases referred 
 to took his instructions from King & Biirss, like every other SherifT; that lie t.njk receipts for 
 moneys collected and paid over under execution in their name in every c.ise. and that he kept 
 his accounts with resjwct to such moneys with them, and not with Mr. Fergusuii, invariably; 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
li 
 
s 
 
 I 
 
 ll 
 
 15 
 
 that Mr. Fer-mson was in all cases provided with money, either !.y King & Barss or by plaintiffs 
 in such suits, at the request of King & Barss, to pay Sheriff's fees so soon a« the same could 
 be ascertained ; and that the alleged "account opened with the Sheriff at Halifax was a 
 p.ivate memorandum kept by the Sheriff for his own convenience in respect to fees only, 
 without the request, concurrence or knowledge of King & Barss. The money, received 
 by Mr Ferguson from the Sheriff were so received on the receipt of " King & Barss. 
 per F •• with King & Barss's authority, and in every case have been promptly reported 
 and immediately paid to King & Barss, or otherwise disposed of under their instructions. 
 See pages 3: 28-44; 4: 1-40; 5: 1-24; 6: 2-33; 7; 7-20 and 37-43 ; «: 1-13 and 
 22-42; 9: 1-11; 10: 6-14 and 22-33 ; 11: 40 4t) ; 12: 1-3 and fi-16. 
 
 4 For the work done by him he was paid in cases resulting iu collections sums ranging from 
 
 «1.50 to $.% m other cases uothing, and in these latter cases he had no claim for 
 
 remuneration from Me«r8 King & Barss. 
 
 Comment -Finding No. 4 is untrue and against the evidence. The evidence 
 
 shews that King & Barss either have paid or expect u, pay Mr. Ferguson iu every case 
 
 where they have employed him according to the work done by him, whether collections 
 
 resulted or not; that $5 was the m<,8t ever paid in any one case, while, taking all the 
 
 ca«e« together in whkh /u; hus been employed, his average remuneration would be $2 or 
 
 even less ; that there has been no case in connection with which work has been done by 
 
 him in which - he had no claim for remuneration from Messrs. King & Barss." and that 
 
 he has been paid in numerous case, in connection with which work had been done by 
 
 him, although no collections resulted. See pages i) : 12-18 and 28-32 ; 10: 20-21; 
 
 11 : 1-3 and 18-28. 
 
 S The relation of Messrs. King & liarss to the said Ferguson is not the ordinary one of a 
 .SoliciU^r to his client, nor is it that of a Solicitor t^ his clerk. They contract to 
 pay him for such business as he brings to their ofhce, while he u to perform the 
 mtchanical portion of the work required thereby. 
 CoMMENT.-(l). Finding No. 5 is untrue and is in direct conflict with the evidence. 
 The evidence shews that Mr. Ferguson, in some business transactions, sustained the ordi- 
 nary relation of client to King & Barss. while iu other transactions their relation was 
 the ordinary one of a Solicitor to his clerk. See pages ^ . 20-23 ; 10 : l,>->0 and 41-42; 
 11 • 17-18 (2) There is no evidence of any contract to pay Mr. Ferguson tor such 
 business as he bn.ught to King& Barss's otfice. as alle-ed ; o„ the contrary, the evidence 
 shews that no 8uch contract ever existed. Seepage 11:.;-J. (3). There is no evidence 
 of any contract by which Mr. Ferguson was' to perform the mechanical portion of the 
 work required bv such business. The evidence shews that it was optional with king & 
 Barss whether o^ not they should employ Mr. Ferguson m every case, and that the only 
 pay he received was for work done. See page 11: 5-8. 
 
 Tin. Council resolve that Messrs. King & Barss, by entering into and carrying into .'•ect the 
 agreement above detailed, are guilty of unprofessional conduct, and have become 
 amenable to, and do hereby receive the censure of, this Council. 
 
 N.B.-^This assumption of penal jurisdiction by certain members of the Council 
 is too absurd for comment. 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
19 
 
 Three distinct cliargea have L^en made in the Complaint ot Messieurs. Meagher 
 and others. , - , . 
 
 1. That King & Barss have been employing a " broker or agent" named W. H. 
 Ferguson to solicit and procure business^ anttlhat business of merchants has been soli- 
 cited by such agent and placed in their hands for suit ! I 
 
 2. That in soliciting business, said agent undertakes that such business will be 
 conducted without foe or reward, except a commission in the event of success, and 
 " business so obtained" is handed to King & Barss 1 ! 
 
 '■i. That King & Barss have violated Section 16 Chapter 93 Revised Statutes, 4th 
 Series, by allowing said Ferguson to prosecute and defend actions iu their names 1 1 
 
 It will be seen that the evidence does not sustain these offensive charges iu any 
 respect, and that they have been dropped. 
 
 The Blunders uttered by certain members of the Council of the Barrister's Society 
 under the thin guise ot " Findings," are infinitely more reprehensible, and are equally 
 without foundation in fact. 
 
 10 
 
 isroxioE -A.3srr> GhRoxjiriDS of -a.ffea.Ij, 
 
 To THE Council of the Nova Scotu Barristers' Society: 
 
 Take notice that the undersigned Edwin D. King and William L. Barss hereby 
 appeal troni the findings and decision of said Council contained in a certain resolution of 20 
 Council bearing date the 15th day of April, instant, and delivered to the said Edwin D. 
 King and VViiliam L. Barss on the 25th day of April instint, in the afternoon of said 
 day, and alleged to be the findings and the decision of said Council on the evidence 
 taken on the investigation ofacertani complaint against the said Edwin I). King and 
 William L. Barss made on the 18th day of last February, by Messieurs. James J. Ritchie, 
 N. H. Meagher and Thomas Ritchie, and the s-iid Edwin D. King and V^illiam L. Barss 
 appeal from the said findings and decision to the next General or Special .Meeting of the 
 said Nova Scotia Barristers' Society, on the following grounds, namely : 
 
 1. Because the Council of the Nova Scotia Barristers' Society had no authority 
 
 to make the said findings and decision, and the same are xdtra vires and beyond the 30 
 jurisdiction of the said Council. 
 
 2. Because the said findings are against evidence.