Page:History of Adelaide and vicinity.djvu/251

 ADELAIDE AND VICINITY 225 The Right Hon. Sir Samuel James Way, Bart., P.C, D.C.L., LL.D. Liciitcnant-Govcruor and Chief Justice of South Australia, Chancellor of the University of Adelaide, Australasian Represcntatii'e on the Judicial Coiuniittee of the Privy Council. A ROVE is the name and description of one who has often been designated by the local Press as "the most distinguished citizen of South Australia." He was born on April 11, 1836. Although claiming, as his father's son, to be a Devonshire man, the birthplace of the future Chief Justice was Portsmouth, in Hampshire- -the circuit in the Bible Christian Connexion of which his father, the Rev. James Way, was then superintendent. In 1850 Air. Way, who was a man of mark in his denomination, came to South Australia with the mission of establishing P)ible Christian Societies in the southern world. His elder son, who had previously spent two years at the denominational Grammar School at Shebbear, near Bideford, was left in luicrland under the educational care of the Rev. Joseph Calrow Means, a distinguished Unitarian minister of high literary and scholarly attainments, whose success as a headmaster had gained for the Maidstone Road School at Chatham a far-extended reputation. On Eebruary 27, 1853, young Way landed in Melbourne ; and on March 6 joined his family in Adelaide. The calling to be selected occasioned a good deal of anxiety to the young colonist, who was just under 17 )ears of age. Pinding that he could qualify for the legal profession in the Province, he entered the office of the late Mr. (afterwards the Hon.) John Tuthill Bagot. After a {if^^ months' experience, during which his taste for legal studies became quite apparent, he transferred himself to the much larger office of the late Mr. Alfred Atkin.son, to whom he was articled in 1856. On March 23, 1861, he was admitted to the Bar ; and shortly afterwards, on the death of Mr. Atkinson, he became the head of the office which he had entered exactly seven years before. These were the days of great opportunities, and it was not long before the young lawyer's qualifications as an advocate attracted attention. His connection with the Moonta case hastened his advancement. Although the result of the litigation was finally unfavorable to his clients, the value of the property in dispute and the nature of the case excited much public interest, and the research and dialectic skill which he displayed soon won for him " the ear of the Court," whilst his earnestness and declamatory power made him equally effective with juries. He found himself pitted against, or the junior of, the late Mr. Ingleby, Mr. P'enn, Mr. T. B. Bruce, Mr. R. B. (afterwards Mr. Justice) Andrews, and Mr. (now Sir) J. P. Boucaut— all lawyers of marked ability — and especially of the late Mr. .Stow, the then leader of the Bar, whose forensic gifts have never been surpassed in Australia and would have gained distinction in an)- part of the world. Mr. Way soon divided with Mr. Stow the leading business at the Bar, and there were few cases of any magnitude in which they were not either engaged on the same side or on opposite sides. In these early years the proceedings of the law courts were reported at much greater length than is possible now, and Mr. Way has often said that he was greatly indebted to the admirable reports of his addresses and arguments, which were contributed to the Rci^ister by Mr. J. H. P'inlayson, for the public attention which his forensic efforts commanded. It was a great advantage also to ha-e the co-operation of his friend and partner, the late Mr. James Brook. Besides managing the general business of the office, that gentleman " devilled ' most industriously for his partner, who confined his attention 1'