28 Dec r 1806

Scotch Reform To L d Grenville

(6

Resolut. 14

Costs

But may it not happen to the judgment of the Court below to be unjust, and does not the very existence of a Court of Appeal assume the /a/ probability of such injustice?

Undoubtedly, my Lord: neither course (where is the course that is?) is altogether free from danger. But, be pleased, my Lord, to weigh danger against danger.

1. Suppose that out of every hundred judgments pronounced by the Court below 49 are wrong, no more than 50 right. Even upon this supposition (and your Lordship sees how extravagant ten[?] are[?]) there is a clear gain to justice by giving the provisional possession to the plff instead of the defendant after a judgment below in favour of the plaintiff gives a clear gain to justice. But in /among/ the most corrupt and shaped[?] Court /Judges/ that ever sat, could the proportion of wrong decisions have ever been any thing near so large?

2. In such case, be pleased to obseerve, my Lord, here is a provisional possession, which as between plaintiff and defendant unless some third hand be found for it, must go to the one or the other: the question is - to which? I say to the plaintiff: and this can upon the supposition that a between right and wrong decision right is not in any degree more probable than wrong. Let the discernment and other qualification of the Judge below be equal to 0: or let the decision be by crop and pick[?]: