date

094-279v] 24 Jan y 1807 C3
094-279v]

24 Jan y 1807

C3 Lett

[...?]6.7.8.9. Juries

There are some causes a great deal too short, too simple for Juries. I do not mean that the time they occupy /in/ at the trial that is in the collection of evidence is too short for the end[?] of judicature, but that the cause being capable of receiving its decision at the very first making (between the parties on which occasion the presence of a Jury could not be made to answer its useful purpose, the effect of submitting it to a Jury is the production of so much factitious delay, vexation and expence, without any other advantage in respect of security against misdecision, then what will be found to attach in a superior degree to the case [...?] it is only in the way of Appeal that the cause is refound[?] to this species of judicature.

In this predicament stand the vast majority of causes: viz.: even of the causes that under the established systematical denial of justice actually taken place; much more of the bar /bars/ by which the great majority of the people are excluded from the protection of the law in civil cases were removed.

That the causes thus circumstanced form a vast majority may be seen by an observation made /in the instance/ of the proportionable number of causes that come before /cognizable by/ the English Courts of Conscience, a number that altogether out of the reach of calculation: without rationing those which come under the cognizance of Justices of the Peace, sitting out of General Session - a multitude altogether out of the reach of calculation.

 Follow the proofs.
Similar Items
  • Title: [5 Jan y 1807 Scotch Reform To L d]
    Description: 5 Jan y 1807

    Scotch Reform To L d Grenville

    Facienda

    Juries why on appeal only

    Is it the case of a redundancy of evidence? for the same reason that no verdict /a verdict/ can /not/ be given on that day, neither can it on any other. Is it the case of a mere deficiency? Here then the cause may be tried by a second Jury, but the labour of the first is thrown away.

    But not only in these incompressible causes which could not be concluded on /at/ the first day /hearing/ could the labours of these 12 men (or whatever else were the number) be thrown away, but so it would in all those causes in which there is really no dispute. But of these, as I have already had occasion to submitt the vast majority of causes is composed. In all these cases Jurymen are either nuisances or puppets. Puppets Jurymen are of use to lawyers: but neither puppets or nuisances are of use to justice.

    Under our over English system, certainly in a very considerable number of the causes that come on before Juries - I should expect to find the greater number - pictures or statues of Jurymen could be very advantageous substitutes to the originals. In one part of the number of these causes, there is nothing for any body to try: in another part, the Juries being there for show but not for use, the cause turning upon jargon, the lawyers settle it among themselves, leaving to the Jury nothing to do but to stare.

    (My Lord, though I have n't them for my motto[?], neither am I without my love for Juries. Were it to depend upon me I too would have Juries: but when I had them it should always in every case for use, in no case for mere show.)
  • Title: [Jan y 1807 Omitt or Postpone 5]
    Description: Jan y 1807

    Omitt or Postpone 5

    1 Proposition

    Letter IV

    Resolut. 6,7,8,9

    Jury

    Lawyers fond of Juries

    I have stated as plainly as was in my power the causes of my own attachment to the mode of Jury judicature: the causes of that attachment, and therein the limits set to it. I will now by your Lordship's indulgence which I state with equal plainness /simplicity/, the causes of that attachment which learned Lords and gentlemen are never tired of manufacturing[?] towards it.

    Thus it is, my Lord, that so far as learned Lords and gentlemen are concerned the causes of their attachment to this [...?] of English liberty, are comprizable[?] in the two words profit and ease: so far as these two agreeable circumstances or either of them accompany it, so far does their attachment /passion/ cleave to it: where both desert it, that is when[?] is rival made[?] possessed of the same charms presents itself, Jury trial shelf without any complaint on their part, is laid upon the shelf.

    The competition (your Lordship sees) is between Jury trial in the first instance, and Natural Procedure, with Jury trial, if necessary afterwards.

    I know[?] then[?] /First/ as to profit - Jury trial in the first instance, no suit without its profits: and these, as every body knows - not small ones. Natural Procedure in the first instnace, in a vast majority of the number of individual suits, no lawyer's profit at all, at least none for Advocates, then and there, the deman perhaps for the assistance of an Attorney given by a part of a day's attendance; but in the majority of individual instances, not even that.
  • Title: [[094-470v] 24 Jan y 1807 A]
    Description: [094-470v]

    24 Jan y 1807

    A +

    Scotland being the scene of action, not England, permitt me to state to Your Lordship without reserve the use I would make of Juries /Trial by Jury in civil suits /cases/.

    I would have all causes /questions of fact/ capable of being brought before this species of Tribunal in the second instance or degree: viz. in the way of Appeal, or (say) New Trial or Appeal: viz: at the instance of either side, for a decision pronounced, after enquiry conducted in the natural mode (still the wild, visionary, arbitrary, Turkish, natural trade!) as in the English Courts of Conscience, the Scottish Small-debt Courts and the civil cases submitted to the cognizance of Justices out of Sessions, on both sides of the Tweed.

    I would have no cause ever brought before a Jury, neither of course, as in England, nor as proposed at the instance of a party, nor by order of the Court, in the first instance.

    All in the way of Appeal, because in that way there is no sort of cause which is not capable of being submitted to the cognizance of a Jury, nor any sort of cause in which that institution is not capable of being rendered subservient to the aggregate of the ends of justice.

    None in the first instance, because there are causes which, the appellation of the institution is physically impossible: others to which though unfortunately the application of it unfortunately is not physically impossible, yet it never is or can be applied without prejudice to the aggregate of the ends of justice.