091-026.xml

Title: [27 July 1806 Scotch Reform /Evidence]

Description: 27 July 1806

Scotch Reform /Evidence/

Let Lawyers adverse

Such thus being in the present state f things the relation between the two interests viz that of diametrical opposition the next point to be inquired into is the possibility of conciliation, which leads of course to an inquiry into /for/ the cause from /in/ which the opposition took its rise.

This cause, a most prominent one, has been already indicated: the shape in which in Scotland, or in England, not to speak of other countries the man of law receives a retribution for his service or pretended service /the wages of learned labour find their way into the hands of the man of law/.

Fees, payable on the occasion under the name of reward[?] /retribution/ for each service or pretended service, express the shape in which the wages of this kind of labour present themselves. If it were altogether out of the power of the labourer /workman/ either to encrease or diminish the number of these occasions, or the quantity of labour in reality or appearance on each, the mode of payment would be not only [...?] but eligible. Unfortunately it has been in the power of lawyers /the men of law[?]/ of former /extant/ times to give continual encrease to the number of these profitable /profit-yielding/ occasions, as well as to the quantity of service or shewn service rendered upon each /in each occasion bestowed/: it has remained still in the power of the men of law of modern times, if not to add /make any very considerable //proportionable// addition/ to the [...?] of those services of profit, at least to protect it against decrease. More unfortunately still to put /draw/ into the pocket of any individual lawyer a small particle of profit /portion of the matter[?] of fees/ taking each lawyer individually, he has been in the case of a surveyor or other agent employed in expenditure paid by a per centage: for every shilling put into his own pocket he has been obliged to draw a pound with its attendant delays and vexations out of the pocket of the employer.

091-031.xml

Title: [July 1806 Scotch Reform Let]

Description: July 1806

Scotch Reform

Let. Lawyers adverse

From the effect with which the proposed /[...?]/ and any /every/ other plan of reform will leave /would operate/ upon the passive faculties of the man of law /upon those faculties //parts of his// [...?] by which he enjoys or suffers/, follows the effect it will but produce upon his active /intellectual/ faculties - upon those faculties from /by/ which /in which any useful/ advice and assistance that could be looked to from that quarter would find their source.

No my Lord - of all the learned persons to whom on this occasion /a subject on which no superiority of talent can place a man above the need the continual need of advice/ Your Lordship has looked to there is not one above interest, prejudice and habits of his whole professional life [...?] not urge /engage/ him to deceive you do not impose on him the necessity of doing what depends on him by /in the way of/ advice by /in the way of/ information towards [...?] the plan abortive.

Between the official lawyer and the professional lawyer though in this respect there is certainly some difference, yet there is not difference enough to prevent them from acting on the same side.

I suppose indemnification: indemnification carried as far as the nature of the use[?] will suffer it to go. Observe then the situation of the official lawyer. The man that may be indemnified - compleatly indemnified - (may and will not [...?] will never be [...?] to be quite synonymous[?]) are himself and his colleagues: the men that can not be indemnified are /among his most //[...?]// intimate/ his familiar friends: friends in all the shades and varieties /degrees/ of friendship companions from youth upwards - dependants relations looking up to him for countenance and patronage.

JB_094_272v.xml

Title: [[094-272v] 27 Oct 1806 B C]

Description: [094-272v]

27 Oct 1806

B C

Evidence

Exclusion II. Causes II. devices

Ch.3. Substitute of enforce[?]

'.3. Use to Lawyers

'.2. Uses to Judge and C o

It is not without valuable causes and considerations that it has become a rule, with Judges (understand always learned Judges) a rule with learned Judges never to suffer themselves, and that an inviolable one, never to hear evidence in any other shape than one in which, in a contested case, of truth and justice were /had been/ the objects, it never would be /have been/ heard at all.

Advantages reaped by Judges and other lawyers from the /never/ receiving testimony in no other shape than that of affidavit evidence.

1. Fees to the Judge or his official subordinates for registration, called filing.

2. Fees to professional members of the partnership for drawing and vamping up.

3. Stamp-duties for the personal accommodation of the financier /Minister of finance/ to give him a corrupt interest in shutting /concerning to shut/ an inexorable door against truth and justice.

4. Ease and accommodation to the Judges, by substituting ready penned evidence in the reception of which they are purely passive to the vivâ voce evidence in the extraction and registration of which they are obliged /as matter of toil and trouble/ to take and active share.

5. Multiplication of suits /Increase of the number/: viz. by the addition of a greater or less proportion of malâ fide demands and defences. He who is in the right and feels himself to be so, attacks or defends himself because /he thinks/ he has the best chance: he who knows he is in the wrong, and sees no hope but in legalized injustice, attacks or defends himself in this way, because in this way he has /sees/ some chance, which in any other way he would have none.

Delivered in this shape, evidence presents the best possible chance of being productive of injustice: and under the technical system injustice, in whatever shape, not only in those which yield ready money, but in whatever other shape, is remotely, if not immediately so much gain to the man of law.

6. Corruption of morals promoted: encouragement given to perjury.

(a) Note that in this most untrustworthy shape Judges know the testimony of persons whose testimony they would not hear in any less untrustworthy shape. See B │ │ Exclusion improper Deception.