HL Deb 25 March 1807 vol 9 cc188-9
Lord Grenville

moved the order of the day for a committee on the Scotch Judicature bill,— The house having resolved itself into a committee, the noble lord stated his intention of moving, pursuant to the instruction of the committee, to divide the bill into two, and also of proposing several amendments in that part of it which related to the chambers of the court of session, and to the court of review. With respect to the latter court, some persons had thought that it would be an additional step in the progress of litigation, inasmuch as the unsuccessful parties would still appeal to that house, and therefore that the number of appeals to that house would not be lessened. There was one mode, however, he thought, which would materially tend to lessen the number of appeals to that house, namely, to abolish reclaiming petitions in the court of session, and to substitute, instead, appeals to the court of review. This would naturally tend to produce a more complete adjudication of causes in the chambers of the court of session, there being no opportunity, as at present, of re-examining their own decisions, whilst there was every reason to believe that that careful adjudication would render appeals less frequent. Of one part of the bill he thought an unfair advantage had been taken out of the house, as he never had an idea that the extraordinary lords to be added to the court of session should hold their places in any other manner than like the judges of England, during good behaviour. He had no objection, if it was thought necessary, to the introduction of clauses, enacting that the persons to be so appointed should have all the requisite qualifications.—After few obserservations from lord Eldon, the amendments were agreed to. In the progress of the bill, lord Grenville stated that upon further consideration, it had been thought inexpedient to prohibit, altogether, appeals from interlocutors; and therefore he proposed to give a power to the court of review to receive appeals from interlocutors, and also on receiving an appeal from final judgment to call for all the interlocutors in the cause. An amendment was adopted to this effect, and the first part of the bill, relating to the chambers of the court of session and the, court of review, having been separated from the rest, the house resumed, and the report was ordered to be received the next day.

Lord Eldon

moved for the appointment of a committee to inquire where the judges of the court of session should be placed during their attendance on the house, and to search for precedents, &c. His reason for moving this was, that [...]he judges of the court of session claimed the right of sitting within the bar, they having formed part of the council of parliament in Scotland.—Agreed to.

Back to