23[?] Dec r 1806

D 1[?] +

Scotch Reform To L d Grenville

Letter 4

Resolut. 6

Jury

Resolution 6 th. For trial of facts, Jury at the instance of either party, or by order of the Court, except as hereafter to be excepted.

Waving /Turning a deaf ear to/ all prepossesions, permitt me, my Lord, to improve /confront/ this provision at once, with the condition of Scotch procedure in other respects, and with the ends of justice.

An important change proposed: to which of the ends of justice is it expected to be subservient?

To the elimination of delay, vexation, and expence? My Lord, it adds to them: yes by the whole amounnt it is an addition made to that mass of collateral in convenience. A little further on, Your Lordship will see if it be not so.

To the prevention of failure of justice? My Lord, its [...?] will produce failure of justice. In no /an/ instance will it prevent that evil: as often as by means /force/ of the delay, vexation and expence a plaintiff, that is he who should have been a plaintiff is either disabled or deterred from seeking justice, failure of justice is the consequence: and as often as by the delay, necessary evidence, or the matter of wealth in the character of the matter of satisfaction perishes.

To the prevention of misdecision? /Here a distinction is to be made./ Here the effects of the change are of a mixt nature: I will endeavour to /disentangle/ present them separate.

Is there common sense in supposing /will any man be found to contend/ that a set of men who in the drawing of conclusions from evidence have had no other experience than what the private circle of a family affords will be found better qualified for the task, than a set of men who upon the most variegated pattern[?] and the most extensive scale have I[?] made it the business of their laws[?]. Experience /Practice/ which is so much in all other arts, is it less than nothing in judicature?