PRIVATE

5[?] June 1807

Letter V

v. No Appeals against Interlocut

v. Proposed prohibition of Appeals against Interlocutors - a bad remedy

I come now to the second of these bad remedies against delay - of these bad expedients for saving the sum of time to the House of Lords - of these imaginary compensations for the delays attendant in Scotland on the proposed Chamber of Review - prohibition of Appeals to the Lords against interlocutors - interlocutory judgments pronounced by the Court of Session.

At the outset of this letter I stated what appeared to me the only ostensible ground on which such an arrangement could have been proposed: no injury done by misdecision no injury done untill the judgment has been final.

On the same occasion I stated what appeared to me a radical objection /contrare[?] objection/ to any arrangement built upon such ground: viz. that between the class of Appeals proposed to be prohibited and the class of Appeals proposed to be still permitted no time of separation has been drawn, has been proposed to be drawn, or is likely to be drawn, so that here is an arrangement of which compleat uncertainty, interminable litigation, and incalculable mischief is the certain consequence.