By direction of the Board of Examiners of Patent Attorneys, the Secretary has forwarded the following letter asking for my advice upon the construction of a resolution passed at a meeting of the Board:

I have the honour, by direction, to ask if you would be so good as to furnish the Board with an opinion as to whether the following resolution passed at a meeting held on the 12th February, 1913, viz.:

In the event of a candidate obtaining a pass in not less than two subjects at one examination he may present himself for examination in the remaining subject or subjects, and any other subject or subjects set by the Board in the interim, at either of the two next succeeding examinations.

allows of a candidate presenting himself for examination at each of the two succeeding examinations, or does such resolution limit the candidate to one only of the two succeeding examinations? In other words, if he presents himself at the next succeeding examination and then fails to pass, can he again present himself for examination six months later?

In my opinion, the intention of the resolution is that if a candidate passes in at least two subjects at one examination, he may claim the opportunity of passing in all the remaining subjects at the next following examination, or at the examination next after that, and I do not think that the fact that he has presented himself at the earlier 'next succeeding' examination and failed to pass in all the outstanding subjects debars him from trying again at the later examination. At one of these two 'next succeeding' examinations he is required to pass in all the outstanding subjects; he cannot pass in some of them at the earlier examination and in the rest at the later. But I do not think that the word 'either' has an exclusive meaning so as to compel him to elect to present himself at one or other of the two 'next succeeding' examinations, and, if he presents himself at the earlier, debar him from presenting himself at the later.

In so advising, I interpret the expression 'two next succeeding examinations' as being intended for 'next two succeeding examinations', for in strictness, there cannot be two next succeeding examinations.

[Vol. 14, p. 71]