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.)