LORD CAMPBELLsaid, he wished to give notice of two Bills that he proposed to bring in at the commencement of the next Session of Parliament, and he made this announcement with the view of drawing public attention to the subject, and in the hope that he might have advice and assistance in framing the measures, which advice and assistance he should most respectfully and gratefully acknowledge. The object of the first measure was to prevent the practice of clandestinely going before a grand jury and preferring bills of indictment for perjury, conspiracy, and other offences, without any inquiry before a magistrate in the presence of the party accused, who ought to have an opportunity of defending himself. The practice had sprung up of going at once before a grand jury and preferring bills of indictment for conspiracy, perjury, and for obtaining money under false pretences, for which charges there was not the slightest foundation; and grand juries were sometimes induced, behind the back of a party, to find a bill, upon which a warrant was obtained, and the party was imprisoned until his trial, or until he found bail. Under this Bill there would be no such prosecutions without appearance before a magistrate, or the consent of a Judge. The other Bill he proposed was, to deal with a rule which had existed from time immemorial, and it was a matter which he approached with very great diffidence. The rule he referred to was that which required the unanimous verdict of a jury. He had of late experienced great inconvenience on this subject. Jurors were very different in their minds, and they sometimes would not defer, not merely to the Judge, but even to the opinion of the large majority of their own body. What he should propose was this—not that they should be governed by a bare majority, but that if, after certain deliberation by the jury, they all agreed except one or two of them, then the verdict of those who so agreed should be considered as tantamount to a verdict of the whole twelve—still subject, of course, to be reviewed by the Court, and to be set aside if necessary. In several cases lately before 2283 him, there had been only one or two discontents, and he had been obliged to discharge the juries. The law was very defective on this subject, and he proposed to introduce a Bill to remedy the defect which he had pointed out, by allowing the opinion of the great majority of the jury to be acted on.