A Path Well-Paved
The WDLS Woman-in-Law Committee is interested in hearing from women who started out their legal professional career more than 25 years ago. We want, and need, to learn from “ngā wāhine toa nei” who paved the way.
Many of those women, to their credit and to our blessing, still hold a current practicing certificate and work in our privileged profession in significant numbers. These women have excelled. They managed to adapt to a traditionally conservative, male-dominated profession and, over time, even helped to rewrite the rulebook to the benefit of both women and men. They are our role models. So, who are they and where are they?
Of those women still in practice in the Wellington District, two were admitted in the 1950s, one in the 1960s, 38 in the 1970s and 15 in the 1980s. In total there are 56 women still with a current practicing certificate who were admitted more than 25 years ago. They are now in virtually all legal work environments: the judiciary, private firms, public sector, and in chambers. It is the journey to this point that we hope to capture and share with you through this column.
In reviewing previous articles on women in the legal profession written in Council Brief and Law Talk, papers presented at conferences, speeches etc., a common thread emerged. There was a single-mindedness; a strength that each of these women obviously possessed and a confidence in their own worth.
Much has been written over the years about the different ways the legal profession could support women lawyers trying to balance professional and personal development/commitments – for example, flexible hours, job sharing, part-time hours, childcare friendly policies, etc. We do not intend to revisit these issues. Instead, we will focus on the ways in which women have dealt with and resolved these issues in their own lives. We want to provide some ingredients for you to create your individual recipe for balancing your personal and professional aspirations and challenges. Most likely there will not be a formal “cookbook” in your workplace - the onus will be on the individual to write their own.
We have got women entering the legal profession in great numbers now, so what can they learn from “ngā wāhine toa nei” that will help them to nurture and develop their legal careers? How can we help them to create their own unique recipe?
Watch this space!
If you were admitted more than 25 years ago and would be willing to answer some questions about your journey in the law, please contact Ruth Nichols on (04) 924 3749, or ruth.nichols@comcom.govt.nz We would love to hear from you.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
SHIRLEY SMITH INAUGURAL ADDRESS
The Inaugural Shirley Smith Address will be held on Thursday 18 September 2008. The Speaker of the House, Honourable Margaret Wilson, will present the keynote address, with Dr George Barton QC sharing his thoughts on Shirley’s life in the law. This address is open to the public. There is no charge to attend. The address has been made possible thanks to the generous support of the New Zealand Law Foundation, Chapman Tripp and the Victoria Law School.
The Committee hopes that this address, and those in the future, will promote the intellect, passion, strength and commitment that our profession demands and deserves, as embodied by Shirley’s life in the law.
The Wellington District Law Society’s Women-in-Law Committee invites you to hear from one of New Zealand’s most accomplished women of the law today, Hon Margaret Wilson, and to honour one of New Zealand’s truly great women of the law, Shirley Smith. Shirley shattered “glass ceilings, took on the establishment and won, and excelled both as an academic and as a practitioner. The following account of Shirley’s life in the law is adapted from eulogies given earlier this year following Shirley’s passing.
Shirley Smith had “been around” the law from a young age. Her father had his law office in Woodward Street in the 1920s, before his elevation to the bench. Shirley would go to the office at the end of the Queen Margaret school day, to wait for her father to take her home. While waiting she could hope to be entertained by his law clerk, Robin Cook, later our most distinguished jurist, - her friend.
Shirley’s father discouraged her early interest in the law – law was no career for a woman; it was “too sordid”. It was not until a lecture in New York in the late 1940s that Shirley’s interest in the law ignited into action. She recalled the incident in an interview with Neville Glasgow on National Radio in January 1989:
“I went to a lecture given by a woman lawyer from the Status of Women Commission. She stood up there on the platform. I can still see her in my mind’s eye – a slim figure in a black suit who proceeded to speak in a most competent and fluent manner. What her subject was I have no idea. I didn’t really take it in at the time because I was so fixated on looking at the slim figure in her black suit. And I said to myself: “You are a lawyer. If you can do it, I can”.
Shirley herself became for many young law students that “woman in the black suit”. Her subsequent achievements, particularly with the Law Society, led to New Zealand’s first woman QC – now the Chief Justice Sian Elias – who, on being called to the Inner Bar, acknowledged Shirley’s role in the law in her address. We understand that, at the mention of Shirley’s name, every woman present rose to her feet to share in that acknowledgement.
On returning to New Zealand in 1951, and with little initial support from family and friends, she enrolled in the Law Faculty of Victoria University in 1952. She was 35 years old at the time. She graduated in 1957 and was admitted that year to the role of barrister and solicitor. At that time she was the 41st woman in New Zealand to be admitted, notwithstanding that it had been 60 years since the first woman had been admitted.
Few women at Law School
There were only about five women in Shirley’s class at law school, and the whole law school was male dominated to the point where one lecturer even refused to let women students attend his lectures, and the traditional law faculty club’s annual dinner excluded women from attending.
The male lecturer who excluded women died before Shirley was due to take his class so she did not have to address that inequality, but she was outraged by the exclusion of women. Shirley took on the faculty in relation to the dinner exclusion, calling a special general meeting, having first enlisted the support of a number of sympathetic male colleagues. She addressed the meeting, adopting not the tone of outrage in principle, but of humour and persuasion, and the decision was reversed.
Perhaps not surprisingly Shirley was the only female student to attend the dinner. By the time she returned to the faculty as a lecturer, the dinners had reverted to men only affairs, and Shirley was once again instrumental in, this time, bringing about a permanent change.
At around the same time, she took on both the Wellington District Law Society and the New Zealand Law Society on the same issue: the policy of excluding women lawyers from their dinners – another battle she won and a significant achievement at the time.
Lecturer at Victoria
Shortly after graduating, Shirley was asked to accept a position as a lecturer at the Law Faculty of Victoria. In accepting, she became the first woman legal academic on a university staff in New Zealand, Victoria University, and was the only female member of the faculty while there. She taught Roman Law and Constitutional Law and, during her tenure, also became the first editor of the Victoria University Law Review.
Shirley Smith taught for only two years but was clearly highly regarded both for her significant intellect and her ability to engage and teach her students. Jeremy Pope was one of her Roman Law students and described her as a breath of fresh air, someone who “made the subject interesting and even entertaining. Suddenly the lecture room was a happy place to be”.
Shirley’s sense of humour was also apparent when the law faculty decided to abolish Roman Law as a subject. Her response? To throw a toga party for her students.
Her contribution to the university was not just in the quality of her teaching, but, as Jeremy Pope continues:
“More than this, she was an outspoken advocate for more women passing through the law school and, as there seemed to be a policy of reducing graduate numbers to a level agreed by the (almost entirely male) profession, this was considered to be extremely radical”.
At age 45 Shirley decided, in her words, “to forsake the hill for the town” and left the university to return to the practice of law she had started as a clerk. It was a slow start as she chose to be a sole practitioner which, while it gave her the flexibility she needed as a working mother, also required her to be a real generalist in her practice. However, over time she came to specialise in two main areas: criminal and family law.
Her family law practice was primarily in the areas of paternity suits and matrimonial property cases, engaging both her intellectual and evidence gathering skills. She obviously developed an impressive reputation particularly amongst women.
Retired Justice of the Court of Appeal, Ted Thomas … recalls in particular Shirley’s practice in family law. He described her as “a real fighter – someone who took the law to its outer limits in advancing the cause of women and family in matrimonial cases”. She was “a pioneer” – “not someone who sought recognition for what she did. She was a real doer with a vast intellect. She could have made a real contribution at a theoretical level but she chose instead to work with people, for whom she had a real empathy”.That empathy was something which shone through in the other area of her practice, criminal law.
Shirley appeared regularly in the Magistrate’s (now District) Courts from the 1960s. Jeremy Pope remembers Shirley’s appearances when he was a younger, less experienced lawyer and reflects now that “she really role modeled for the less experienced practitioner how someone with a sense of calling to the law conducts him or herself. Not as seeing it as a path to riches, but rather seeing it as a solemn duty to leave no person unrepresented, no matter the lack of means to pay. Throughout she showed a passion for justice which many others had worn out of them by the grind of over-work. She was unfailingly generous and unfailingly kind … No-one who was in the courts where she appeared – be they counsel, court clerk, defendant or judge – will ever forget her”…
Black Power
Shirley became very well known for her work for the Black Power Gang, a role she clearly valued and enjoyed. Her involvement came about through her law clerk at the time, George Rosenberg, who introduced her to Dennis O’Reilly, and he, in turn, introduced the Black Power Gang to her.
Shirley was very successful as the Gang’s lawyer. Despite their serious offending from time to time, she seemed to be able to see past that to the individual. At times her role was a reasonably controversial one. In responding to a question about it in an interview, she replied:
“I am not to be congratulated for what I do. I am just grateful that I have discovered these marvelous people. If other people would treat them on the same sort of basis, I think they would find that they were very much rewarded. The trouble is, you see, they expect to be rejected. They expect contempt and hostility and when they get it they fire up immediately … If people could only learn to give everybody the benefit of the doubt to start with, basically, no matter what they look like, there is a human being in there.”
Not only did she respect them as individuals, but she clearly had their respect also. This is demonstrated by an incident that was recounted where a member of the gang had taken a woman and child hostage. He was armed. The police were called to the scene and they too were armed. He was unable to be persuaded to release the child. The gang’s lawyer, Shirley Smith, was called. Showing great courage and a real faith in her client, Shirley walked alone and unarmed into the house. After several minutes she emerged with the baby.
In fact, it is her respect for all people that George Rosenberg recalls. He spent his first five years of practice working with her and recalled “her total dedication to clients and endless patience, despite the hopelessness of many of them and their situations”. What surprised this young – then radical – lawyer was that she also saw the best in the police and the judges – people he had entered the practice of law believing were “swine by definition”! – a view Shirley managed to change over time.
Shirley Smith’s practice was not restricted to the Magistrate’s and District Courts. She also worked with Pat Booth on the Arthur Alan Thomas case, applying her formidable energy and analytical skills to all aspects of the case and contributing in a significant way to its successful outcome – something officially recognised by the society formed to fight for Arthur Alan Thomas’s release.
On a personal level, she brought those same intellectual, analytical and deductive skills to bear when she assisted Mike Bungay in defending her husband – doing the often unseen part of any successful practice of law: the hard but essential detailed analysis of evidence – or lack of evidence – against him. Those who knew her at the time are in no doubt at all that she must share the credit for his successful defence.
Shirley gave up the practice of law in the early 1990s. In 1995 she was voted an honorary life member of the Wellington District Law Society. Writing in the Victoria University Law Review in 1993 she concludes “I have given up my solicitor’s certificate because I have so many other things that I must do and put in order before I die which have been neglected during my long preoccupation with the law. I miss my clients. I miss the practice of law, but perhaps it is time I gave up, because I doubt if I could accommodate myself to the changes. I love to research the law in the books but now the library is deserted and the offices rely on computerised databases. I have no computer or fax machine, not even a word processor. What typing I do is still done on my old Imperial 70. The Dickensian old offices of the past are long gone and I find the modern day offices uncongenial. My day is past, but it was a good day”.
The Committee hopes that this address, and those in the future, will promote the intellect, passion, strength and commitment that our profession demands and deserves, as embodied by Shirley’s life in the law.
The Wellington District Law Society’s Women-in-Law Committee invites you to hear from one of New Zealand’s most accomplished women of the law today, Hon Margaret Wilson, and to honour one of New Zealand’s truly great women of the law, Shirley Smith. Shirley shattered “glass ceilings, took on the establishment and won, and excelled both as an academic and as a practitioner. The following account of Shirley’s life in the law is adapted from eulogies given earlier this year following Shirley’s passing.
Shirley Smith had “been around” the law from a young age. Her father had his law office in Woodward Street in the 1920s, before his elevation to the bench. Shirley would go to the office at the end of the Queen Margaret school day, to wait for her father to take her home. While waiting she could hope to be entertained by his law clerk, Robin Cook, later our most distinguished jurist, - her friend.
Shirley’s father discouraged her early interest in the law – law was no career for a woman; it was “too sordid”. It was not until a lecture in New York in the late 1940s that Shirley’s interest in the law ignited into action. She recalled the incident in an interview with Neville Glasgow on National Radio in January 1989:
“I went to a lecture given by a woman lawyer from the Status of Women Commission. She stood up there on the platform. I can still see her in my mind’s eye – a slim figure in a black suit who proceeded to speak in a most competent and fluent manner. What her subject was I have no idea. I didn’t really take it in at the time because I was so fixated on looking at the slim figure in her black suit. And I said to myself: “You are a lawyer. If you can do it, I can”.
Shirley herself became for many young law students that “woman in the black suit”. Her subsequent achievements, particularly with the Law Society, led to New Zealand’s first woman QC – now the Chief Justice Sian Elias – who, on being called to the Inner Bar, acknowledged Shirley’s role in the law in her address. We understand that, at the mention of Shirley’s name, every woman present rose to her feet to share in that acknowledgement.
On returning to New Zealand in 1951, and with little initial support from family and friends, she enrolled in the Law Faculty of Victoria University in 1952. She was 35 years old at the time. She graduated in 1957 and was admitted that year to the role of barrister and solicitor. At that time she was the 41st woman in New Zealand to be admitted, notwithstanding that it had been 60 years since the first woman had been admitted.
Few women at Law School
There were only about five women in Shirley’s class at law school, and the whole law school was male dominated to the point where one lecturer even refused to let women students attend his lectures, and the traditional law faculty club’s annual dinner excluded women from attending.
The male lecturer who excluded women died before Shirley was due to take his class so she did not have to address that inequality, but she was outraged by the exclusion of women. Shirley took on the faculty in relation to the dinner exclusion, calling a special general meeting, having first enlisted the support of a number of sympathetic male colleagues. She addressed the meeting, adopting not the tone of outrage in principle, but of humour and persuasion, and the decision was reversed.
Perhaps not surprisingly Shirley was the only female student to attend the dinner. By the time she returned to the faculty as a lecturer, the dinners had reverted to men only affairs, and Shirley was once again instrumental in, this time, bringing about a permanent change.
At around the same time, she took on both the Wellington District Law Society and the New Zealand Law Society on the same issue: the policy of excluding women lawyers from their dinners – another battle she won and a significant achievement at the time.
Lecturer at Victoria
Shortly after graduating, Shirley was asked to accept a position as a lecturer at the Law Faculty of Victoria. In accepting, she became the first woman legal academic on a university staff in New Zealand, Victoria University, and was the only female member of the faculty while there. She taught Roman Law and Constitutional Law and, during her tenure, also became the first editor of the Victoria University Law Review.
Shirley Smith taught for only two years but was clearly highly regarded both for her significant intellect and her ability to engage and teach her students. Jeremy Pope was one of her Roman Law students and described her as a breath of fresh air, someone who “made the subject interesting and even entertaining. Suddenly the lecture room was a happy place to be”.
Shirley’s sense of humour was also apparent when the law faculty decided to abolish Roman Law as a subject. Her response? To throw a toga party for her students.
Her contribution to the university was not just in the quality of her teaching, but, as Jeremy Pope continues:
“More than this, she was an outspoken advocate for more women passing through the law school and, as there seemed to be a policy of reducing graduate numbers to a level agreed by the (almost entirely male) profession, this was considered to be extremely radical”.
At age 45 Shirley decided, in her words, “to forsake the hill for the town” and left the university to return to the practice of law she had started as a clerk. It was a slow start as she chose to be a sole practitioner which, while it gave her the flexibility she needed as a working mother, also required her to be a real generalist in her practice. However, over time she came to specialise in two main areas: criminal and family law.
Her family law practice was primarily in the areas of paternity suits and matrimonial property cases, engaging both her intellectual and evidence gathering skills. She obviously developed an impressive reputation particularly amongst women.
Retired Justice of the Court of Appeal, Ted Thomas … recalls in particular Shirley’s practice in family law. He described her as “a real fighter – someone who took the law to its outer limits in advancing the cause of women and family in matrimonial cases”. She was “a pioneer” – “not someone who sought recognition for what she did. She was a real doer with a vast intellect. She could have made a real contribution at a theoretical level but she chose instead to work with people, for whom she had a real empathy”.That empathy was something which shone through in the other area of her practice, criminal law.
Shirley appeared regularly in the Magistrate’s (now District) Courts from the 1960s. Jeremy Pope remembers Shirley’s appearances when he was a younger, less experienced lawyer and reflects now that “she really role modeled for the less experienced practitioner how someone with a sense of calling to the law conducts him or herself. Not as seeing it as a path to riches, but rather seeing it as a solemn duty to leave no person unrepresented, no matter the lack of means to pay. Throughout she showed a passion for justice which many others had worn out of them by the grind of over-work. She was unfailingly generous and unfailingly kind … No-one who was in the courts where she appeared – be they counsel, court clerk, defendant or judge – will ever forget her”…
Black Power
Shirley became very well known for her work for the Black Power Gang, a role she clearly valued and enjoyed. Her involvement came about through her law clerk at the time, George Rosenberg, who introduced her to Dennis O’Reilly, and he, in turn, introduced the Black Power Gang to her.
Shirley was very successful as the Gang’s lawyer. Despite their serious offending from time to time, she seemed to be able to see past that to the individual. At times her role was a reasonably controversial one. In responding to a question about it in an interview, she replied:
“I am not to be congratulated for what I do. I am just grateful that I have discovered these marvelous people. If other people would treat them on the same sort of basis, I think they would find that they were very much rewarded. The trouble is, you see, they expect to be rejected. They expect contempt and hostility and when they get it they fire up immediately … If people could only learn to give everybody the benefit of the doubt to start with, basically, no matter what they look like, there is a human being in there.”
Not only did she respect them as individuals, but she clearly had their respect also. This is demonstrated by an incident that was recounted where a member of the gang had taken a woman and child hostage. He was armed. The police were called to the scene and they too were armed. He was unable to be persuaded to release the child. The gang’s lawyer, Shirley Smith, was called. Showing great courage and a real faith in her client, Shirley walked alone and unarmed into the house. After several minutes she emerged with the baby.
In fact, it is her respect for all people that George Rosenberg recalls. He spent his first five years of practice working with her and recalled “her total dedication to clients and endless patience, despite the hopelessness of many of them and their situations”. What surprised this young – then radical – lawyer was that she also saw the best in the police and the judges – people he had entered the practice of law believing were “swine by definition”! – a view Shirley managed to change over time.
Shirley Smith’s practice was not restricted to the Magistrate’s and District Courts. She also worked with Pat Booth on the Arthur Alan Thomas case, applying her formidable energy and analytical skills to all aspects of the case and contributing in a significant way to its successful outcome – something officially recognised by the society formed to fight for Arthur Alan Thomas’s release.
On a personal level, she brought those same intellectual, analytical and deductive skills to bear when she assisted Mike Bungay in defending her husband – doing the often unseen part of any successful practice of law: the hard but essential detailed analysis of evidence – or lack of evidence – against him. Those who knew her at the time are in no doubt at all that she must share the credit for his successful defence.
Shirley gave up the practice of law in the early 1990s. In 1995 she was voted an honorary life member of the Wellington District Law Society. Writing in the Victoria University Law Review in 1993 she concludes “I have given up my solicitor’s certificate because I have so many other things that I must do and put in order before I die which have been neglected during my long preoccupation with the law. I miss my clients. I miss the practice of law, but perhaps it is time I gave up, because I doubt if I could accommodate myself to the changes. I love to research the law in the books but now the library is deserted and the offices rely on computerised databases. I have no computer or fax machine, not even a word processor. What typing I do is still done on my old Imperial 70. The Dickensian old offices of the past are long gone and I find the modern day offices uncongenial. My day is past, but it was a good day”.
2007 Shirley Smith Council Brief Article
The Wellington District Law Society’s Women-in-Law Committee propose to hold an annual lecture in honour of Shirley Smith, one of New Zealand’s great women of the law. The Committee proposes to hold the inaugural lecture later this year.
Shirley Smith was 35 years old when she enrolled at the Victoria University Law School in 1952. She qualified and practiced law in New Zealand at a time when there were very few women in the legal profession. Her endeavours in the law reflected a determination to ensure justice and counsel was received by all. She was inspirational both to her colleagues and to those she represented. The Committee hopes that by honouring her contribution to the law by way of this annual lecture, we will not only celebrate and respect her life in the law, but also will facilitate her continuing to inspire men and women of all ages to come to this privileged and honoured profession.
Sadly Shirley Smith passed away on 29 December 2007. An obituary, with edits from a eulogy presented by Judge Ema Aitken at Shirley’s funeral service, was published in Council Brief in February 2008. In reading that obituary one could not help but be inspired by this woman of intellect, passion, strength, and commitment to the law and justice.
The New Zealand Law Foundation has generously donated a grant of money to fund this inaugural lecture. The Committee extends its sincere appreciation to the Law Foundation. The Committee is also privileged to have the support of Shirley’s family and members of the legal profession, including the Wellington District Law Society and the Victoria Law Faculty, in promoting this annual lecture in Shirley’s honour.
If you would like to contribute ideas or provide assistance for the proposed lecture, please contact Ruth Nichols on 924 3749 or ruth.nichols@comcom.govt.nz.
Shirley Smith was 35 years old when she enrolled at the Victoria University Law School in 1952. She qualified and practiced law in New Zealand at a time when there were very few women in the legal profession. Her endeavours in the law reflected a determination to ensure justice and counsel was received by all. She was inspirational both to her colleagues and to those she represented. The Committee hopes that by honouring her contribution to the law by way of this annual lecture, we will not only celebrate and respect her life in the law, but also will facilitate her continuing to inspire men and women of all ages to come to this privileged and honoured profession.
Sadly Shirley Smith passed away on 29 December 2007. An obituary, with edits from a eulogy presented by Judge Ema Aitken at Shirley’s funeral service, was published in Council Brief in February 2008. In reading that obituary one could not help but be inspired by this woman of intellect, passion, strength, and commitment to the law and justice.
The New Zealand Law Foundation has generously donated a grant of money to fund this inaugural lecture. The Committee extends its sincere appreciation to the Law Foundation. The Committee is also privileged to have the support of Shirley’s family and members of the legal profession, including the Wellington District Law Society and the Victoria Law Faculty, in promoting this annual lecture in Shirley’s honour.
If you would like to contribute ideas or provide assistance for the proposed lecture, please contact Ruth Nichols on 924 3749 or ruth.nichols@comcom.govt.nz.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Welcome!
Kia ora and welcome to the latest initiative from the Wellington Women in Law Committee!
A quick quiz:
A) Are you female?
B) Do you live in the Wellington region?
C) Are you studying or have you studied law?
Well this blog is for you!
We want this blog to be as interactive as possible to discuss ideas and issues as well as keeping you up to date with Committee events and action.
A quick quiz:
A) Are you female?
B) Do you live in the Wellington region?
C) Are you studying or have you studied law?
Well this blog is for you!
We want this blog to be as interactive as possible to discuss ideas and issues as well as keeping you up to date with Committee events and action.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)