28 Oct r 1807

L d Eldons Bill

Provides nevertheless

(│ │) (Provided nevertheless) Of the adverb nevertheless, the effect is to give intimation of an opposition /a repugnancy/, either apparent only, or real but partial between the clause which it introduces, and that which it immediately follows. The clause last preceding having appointed /been occupied in appointing/ an order of distribution as between cause and cause remitted to the Court or Courts of Session from the House of Lords, and in so doing having left no discretionary power to that highest seat of appellate judicature, the conception immediately presented by the word nevertheless was that that omission /which neither and nor ought for a moment to be made, was about to be thus awkwardly required. - No such thing: no repugnancy, no opposition in the case. The hands of the House remain tied up - uselessly, wantonly, disrespectfully and perhaps perniciously tied up - when a word or two, (such as in course, or regularly, or unless in so far as Order may be made by the House to the contrary) would have been sufficient to keep them loose.

Hereupon two observations present themselves as being called for by this proviso clause. 1. That it ought not to have been inserted at all: as being altogether useless, (of a tendency /character/ disrespectful to the House, and) tending to beget doubts derogatory to the discretionary power actually belonging to the House, and necessary to the due discharge of its /the/ judicial function in conformity to the ends of justice. 2. That if it were fit /proper/ to be inserted it could not with any propriety be inserted in the character of a proviso: not having /standing/ /being/ either in reality or in appearance, in any respect in opposition to the last preceding or to any other preceding clause. Can any thing be more favourable to confusion, than a certificate of repugnancy where there is none?