[094-277v]

11 Feb y 1807

Letter IV

[...?] 6.7.8.9 [...?]

1. If every man who wishes for a Jury trial has /may have/ one, nothing more can be derived by the most passionate enthusiastic admirers.

2. Where neither party wishes for a Jury, it is with respect to the main end of justice security against misdecision, unless at least in the opinion of all those to whom it belongs to judge and in respect of those ends which regard delay, vexation and expence it is evidently uncandescence[?] and repugnant.

3. To consider /Taking the matter on the footing of/ delay alone, place Jury trial in this respect upon the best footing possible, a Judge will always be able to give a decision soever without them with a Jury.

4. Judicature by a Judge, a single Judge - is the most natural, the most simple mode. Supposing either party to be dissatisfied with the decision pronounced by the Judge, it is matter of great comfort and advantage to him to be able to lay his cause before a Jury, of whose impartiality he is afraid. But it is time enough for him to appeal from the decision of the Judge, when he is dissatisfied with it: and it is time enough for him to be dissatisfied with it, when he knows what it is.

Most admirable, Jury trial, my lord in the character of a medicine! a specific, a very panacea for one /some/ of the disorders to which the judicial system of judicature is exposed. As medicine, yes:- but how is it these quacks employ it? They give it instead as daily bread /food/. As well give opinion in that character or the bark[?], instead of bread. Give it? no: not in half the causes cases in which they charge for it are given. And why give it in reality[?], why give it in [...?]?- Why? because of the Apothecary's bills they make for it.