Page:A colonial autocracy, New South Wales under Governor Macquarie, 1810-1821.djvu/245

 prevent the frauds and mischiefs which individuals suffer from the mal-practices of those who are a disgrace to the profession and a menace to the public, how could judges here without such assistance or means of prevention guard against the chicanery and the never-ceasing tricks of those who have been expelled their profession and transported here in punishment of their misconduct." He did not, however, desire to give the two solicitors sent by the Crown a perpetual monopoly. "The rule I should have proposed to adopt was the rule in India, viz., that all admitted attorneys in England or Ireland, or articled clerks to such, bringing with them their certificates of good conduct, and all persons who had been articled clerks to attorneys admitted here, should be admitted attorneys of the respective courts; and that without any limitation as to number. &hellip;"

Broughton and Riley, the two men whom he tried to convince, were of very different calibre, but alike in knowing little of the law. Riley, who has been frequently mentioned, and who was the chief witness before the Committee on Gaols in 1819, was a successful merchant and an honest, straightforward and intelligent man. He was not in any respect dependent on the Governor's favour, but did in this case hold the same opinion. He had sat many times with the Judge-Advocate in the Civil Court, and had not once dissented from his views. Broughton, who had begun his colonial career very low down on the Commissariat Staff and slowly risen to be Deputy-Commissary General, was a burly, blusterous man, ignorant and blunt, but nevertheless a great favourite with Macquarie. Riley was under no obligations to the Governor and was soon afterwards sharply opposed to him in a matter of trade, but Broughton was very much under Macquarie's influence.

On neither could Bent make any impression. "The statute 12 Geo. I., cap. 29, s. 4" and "the case ex-parte Brownsall," they