Hansard Excerpt 14 December 1945 of a speech by Lew Austin, MP. This gives his post-war stance on lawyers, and the preferential treatment they received when it came to serving or rather not serving their country.
In the words of Lew's son David Austin, a solicitor and the founder of the Sydney legal firm, Packer and Austin, this speech displays "my fathers eloquence in the House of Commons showing a healthy distaste for lawyers":
A labour party meeting in The Freemasons Arms, Hampstead, a smoky London pub, 1945. The man with his back to to the camera, smoking pipe, front right, bears a slight resemblance to Lew Austin.
 |
| Austin Tea Party: A rare personal photo from the Austin family archive. Chistmas 1963 in Hove, England. Lew Austin, seated (centre) appears to be packing his pipe with tobacco after the family have enjoyed a festive meal together. |
2.22 p.m.
Mr. Austin (Stretford)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for. Hornsey (Mr. Gammans)
for contributing to this Debate and enabling us to direct our minds to
the more general question of releases from the Forces, instead of
centralising the Debate on lawyers. I think there was one intervention
from the hon. Member for Down (Dr. Little) who dealt with the question
of the release of students at large. There was also a previous complaint
that students of law had not been granted parity with other students in
their release, and there is a very good reason for that. I think the
hon. and gallant Member for South Croydon (Lieut.-Colonel Rees-Williams)
listed a number of students who had had priority in release over
students of law. Who were they? They were students of medicine who are
very necessary in the life of our people. Then dentists are very
necessary, because curing a toothache is more important than the
headache which the lawyers are likely to give us. A veterinary surgeon
is most important. A student of architecture is most important;
accordingly—and quite rightly—the Ministry of Labour give precedence to
those students over students of law who are not productive at all.
§ Lieut.-Colonel Rees-Williams
Would my hon. Friend say that an arts student was more important than a legal student?
§ Mr. Austin
With my great appreciation of the aesthetic side of life, I would certainly say that an art student is more important to the life of the community than a legal student, who only involves us in more longwinded difficulties. I think my hon. Friend probably has in mind other students of a different complexion. Art students contribute more to the gaiety, beauty and joyousness of life than these sombre advocates of the law who make a nuisance of our lives in the manner which we know so well. Great play has been made in the Debate of the fact that there was almost no deferment for members of the legal profession, and quite rightly, too. They have been of no productive use to the community in peacetime.
§ Mr. Paget
What does the hon. Gentleman think he is doing here if he has those 857 views on lawyers? What is the point of making laws if you are not going to allow them to be interpreted?
§ Mr. Austin
I welcome the interjection.??? hold the conviction that in previous Parliaments there were two elements which were predominant and which could very well be lessened. The first—and I say it without bias—was the trade union leader element, and the second was the lawyer element. We have, to a degree, dissipated the trade union leader element, and now I hope we shall deal with the lawyer element, because I feel we need in the House representatives from the man in the street who can put a plain and straightforward point of view with regard to simple law, moral and ethics.
§ Brigadier Low (Blackpool, North)
Would the hon. Gentleman perhaps start on the President of the Board of Trade?
§ Mr. Austin
I have a great admiration for the President of the Board of Trade, and I am not castigating the whole of the legal profession.
§ Mr. Austin
I am addressing myself completely to the Motion. I am speaking from the point of view of the right of other members of the Forces to release, not only in parity with the members of the legal profession but to take precedence over members of the legal profession in regard to release. Some weeks ago I put down a Question as to whether the Minister of Labour would consider the release from the Forces of those who had served five years, and I maintain, with all due respect, that members of the Forces, whether they be dustmen, engineers, agricultural workers or miners, all have a greater right of precedence to release from the Forces, particularly if they have served live years, than members of the legal profession.
§ Mr. Janner
Does the hon. Gentleman not know that, in fact, preference has already been granted, and in common sense these men will not be able to deal with their various difficulties from the legal standpoint unless they have someone to help them?
§ Mr. Austin
I grant the point made by the hon Member for West Leicester (Mr. Janner) to a degree, but the fact is that 858 lawyers have been found necessary in the past because in the social structure there are certain inherent weaknesses, and we shall do our best to avoid those weaknesses in the future. It is a fact that the legal profession functions only on the basis of people's difficulties, whether it be between one person on another or between one business and another, and, accordingly, litigation is called for.If we are to talk at all about the question of the release of members of the Forces, I think we ought to bear in mind the Debate that took place yesterday. We should bear in mind that of greater value to the economy of this country would be the release of any person who would be useful in our export trade. He should take precedence over any member of the legal profession, or of any other non-productive profession which has had no real constructive or useful place in the function of our society. Would hon. Members submit for one moment that a law student should take precedence in release over a miner or an agricultural worker, or any other member of the community who is concerned with productive work? I ask hon. Members who belong to the legal profession to bear this point in mind. The economy of this country needs, above all, productive workers, and the incidental fact that certain difficulties in the private lives of those productive workers may be alleviated by the intervention of members of the legal profession is a secondary consideration. I cannot see why priority of any kind should be granted to members of the legal profession in their release from the Forces. I ask the Minister of Labour to harden his heart against this plea, and to switch his activity to the further release of all those who can be of real service, particularly in industry, to the community.
 |
| Parliamentary Clerks on the way to the halls of Westminster, 1945. Winston Churchill is in the background. |
http://hansard.
Picture sources:
1945 Labour party meeting in smokey London pub, The Freemasons Arms, Hampstead.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Public_House_Debate-
Clerks on the way to Parliament, 1945. Winston Churchill is in the background.
http://www.allposters.co.uk/-sp/Winston-Churchill-on-His-Way-to-the-Houses-of-Parliament-on-Ve-Day-For-Victory-Service-1945-Posters_i4173177_.htm
