What's the alternative?

March 9, 2009

Dear Sir,

May I share this memorable quotation from Sir Alex Fraser Tytler (1742-1813) with you and your readers?

A Scottish jurist and historian, Sir Alex Fraser Tytler, was widely known in his time and was professor of Universal History at Edinburgh University in the late 18th Century. This quotation is from the 1801 collection of his lectures.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that time on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by dictatorship.

"The average age of the world's great western civilisations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through the same sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back to bondage."

It seems we're on the downward spiral, as we celebrate our 400th anniversary. The question is what's the alternative and how do we free ourselves? To vote; or, not to vote?

PATRICIA

Smith's

Each role has privileges

March 1, 2009

Dear Sir,

I may be an avid listener of the Hott 107.5 radio station, but I'm also a Christian that stands firm on my religious beliefs. I was taught about God the father, God the son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Every Sunday growing up in Bermuda until I was about 18 years old I had to attend Sunday school and then church. While on the other hand every Monday morning at school I would hear stories of fellow classmates attending Coney Island, and football games. I attended youth fellowship almost every Friday night and during choir rehearsal I would be sitting in the congregation area of the church doing my homework. The teachings became a part of my being, until one day I thought that I was a man under my mother's roof by trying to bend the truth, and she didn't spare the rod. I ended up rebelling and was kicked out of the homestead. OK … enough about me, because I took time out of my not so busy day to write this letter to Mr. Thaao Dill (blip, blip) and the listening audience of Hott 107.5 radio station. The topic of man being the head of the household has been going on for a couple of days now, and I would like to give my input on the situation at hand (I would've called the station, but I know my views would have you adding more buts and how comes during my sharing).

1. I'll start off with politics (majority of us use the saying politrics even though it's not a word). Politics played a major part in pagan religions such as the worship of Baal-berith. Governments often went so far as to hire prostitutes to bring in additional money. In many cases a religious system was set up and supported by the government so the offerings could fund community projects. Religion became a profit- making business. In Israel's religion, this was strictly forbidden. God's system of religion was designed to come from an attitude of the heart, not from calculated plans and business opportunities. It was also designed to serve people and help those in need, not to oppress the needy.

2. God made both man and woman in his image. Neither man nor woman is made more in the image of God than the other. From the beginning the Bible places both man and woman at the pinnacle of God's creation. Neither sex is exalted, nor is neither depreciated. Over the decades I believe that man has confused having dominion over the animals with having dominion over their wives and women in general. God formed and equipped man and woman for various tasks, but all of these tasks lead to the same goal – honouring God. Man gives life to woman; woman gives life to the world. Each role (Yes, Thaao, role) carries exclusive privileges; there is no room for thinking that one sex is superior to the other (You didn't state this point, but what isn't directed at you is for whomever it concerns). God bless you and may he give you sight and light instead of insight in this time of darkness.

DESAI MARDEL JONES

Sandys

I do not feel safe

March 9, 2009

Dear Sir,

I am writing to commend Col. Burch on his stance on the quality of our Police Service. As a victim of a crime and more recently of a traffic accident the service of the Bermuda Police "Service" was criminal! No, I do not feel safe in my own country nor do I feel the Police are here to protect me or my family. I don't wish to demoralise the whole Police Service but I need to see an improvement. I would like to thank Col. Burch for his service to this country; for his courage and strength in speaking the truth. He's one of the few politicians who talks the talk and more importantly walks the talk!

IN GRATITUDE

Smith's

A barrister's duty

March 10, 2009

Dear Sir,

The Mid-Ocean News article of March 6, 2009: "Harold Darrell: 'I accuse …' should have captured the attention of all concerned citizens of Bermuda. According to Mr. Darrell, his lawyer allegedly told him the Bank of Bermuda had pressured his firm, Wakefield Quin, to drop him as a client. Lawyer Richard Horseman, however, denies saying this. My question is, why was it necessary for Mr. Horseman to call Mr. Darrell at 7.05 a.m. to share the information that he could not meet with him later that day? Did this matter interfere with Mr. Horseman's sleep to the point of calling his client with such urgency at daybreak?

What's disturbing is that, as is alleged in the Mid-Ocean News article, the lawyer told the client something and now denies saying it. Why was it necessary for the lawyer to deny the accusation if the "Code" states: 4: "A barrister must discharge his duties to his client, the court, members of the public and his fellow members of the profession with integrity and in accordance with this Code"? I would think that by denying an accusation that can be proven reflects badly on the individual's integrity. If it is true that the lawyer tried to influence his client to drop his case against the bank, how beneficial was that advice to the client? Point 10 of the Barristers' Code of Professional Conduct 1981 ("the Code") states that: "A barrister should advise and encourage a client to settle a dispute whenever such a course appears to be advantageous for the client."

My concern is that the "Code" for barristers clearly states: 5. "The conduct of a barrister within or outside the professional sphere must not be likely to impair a client's trust in him as a professional consultant."

If that isn't clear enough, it goes on to say in 7. "A barrister has a duty to uphold the interest of his client without regard to his own interest or to any consequences to himself or to other persons." I have observed that far too many rules, policies and procedures are not being adhered to.

In a separate matter, I have yet to find out why one of the law firms mentioned in the article failed to refer to a particular point when they were representing an ordinary client in another matter, yet the same point is now crucial in the firm's representation of a fellow member of the legal fraternity. The subsequent lawyer, who took over the case from the law firm mentioned, refused to refer to the same point when instructed to do so in the presence of a witness, and before the hearing was adamant that he could not refer to the point, and once confronted after the judgment was announced, the excuse for not referring to it was that he didn't want to annoy the Chief Justice. How did the lawyer know beforehand that the Chief Justice was going to preside over the case?

It was recently proven that laws can be amended to accommodate certain requests; while on the other hand, it has also been proven that obstacles can be placed in one's path (depending on who it is) to hamper one's progress.

In the article "Julian Hall defiant on creditors", the comments that Mr. Hall would rather 'quit his job'…than continue to make payments towards a debt he believes has been grossly inflated, and his feeling about being ripped off does not bode well with the average client who is expected to put up retainers of $10,000 plus, in some instances, before any work begins; pay his bill on time or have interest added to the bill; or risk having the barrister withdraw his services. The latter being mentioned in the "Code": "A barrister may withdraw his services from a client if — (ii) his fees are not paid within a reasonable time of being demanded…"

Shouldn't barristers be striving to improve the administration of justice in a more respectful manner? Let's be realistic. How many lawyers genuinely care about whether or not a client has other commitments when the client is billed? Even when the client feels that he/she has been ripped off by his/her lawyer after receiving shoddy service, the client will most definitely face repercussions if he/she was to adopt the same attitude as the lawyer who feels that he has no legal or moral responsibility to settle his debt with his creditors. Who is really protected – the client or the lawyer?

Through it all, I will close with an interesting comment once made to me by a lawyer, and that is, 'law and religion don't go together'; sadly that individual, I might add, remains on the practising members list of barristers … God bless his soul!

J. CAINES

Devonshire

Kudos to Liane and Ryan

March 6, 2009

Dear Sir,

It is so nice to receive helpful advice and friendly service when buying locally. I take my hat off to Liane (sales) and Ryan (delivery) at Computer City for making parting with money such a pleasure. Yours boosting the economy,

ANDREW R. DOBLE

Hamilton Parish

Contributing to the problem

March 6, 2009

Dear Sir,

I have only high praise for Minister David Burch and his stand and words on how he wants the Police to deal with drug dealers and "little punks". The war against drugs and violence is being lost – the numbers tell us that. As for Mr. Pettingill's call for Lt. Col. Burch to resign – that is what we can expect from someone who contributes to the problem. Lawyers; even Jesus Christ damned lawyers in the book of Matthew, and He knew a thing or two.

Don't tell me every person is entitled to be defended in a court of law – I know that. But if you must lie down with dogs, you are more than likely to end up scratching those fleas. If the "proper structure of law and order" is tying the hands of the police behind their back, if the "proper structure of law and order" leaves law abiding citizens at the mercy of "punks", and if 'punks' can intimidate a whole country – well, then it is time to change those laws. Have you ever wondered about this modern-day miracle; that captured drug money is confiscated as being "dirty", illicit gain etc. – but that same money, when it touches the open and eager palm of a lawyer is suddenly rendered pure, clean, without blemish, etc.

MARK EMMERSON

Pembroke