§ On the question for the second reading of this bill, touching the administration of justice in Scotland,
The Lord Chancellorexplained at some length his views upon this subject, and the objects of the bill; which were to divide the court of session into two chambers of seven and eight judges, to give those courts certain powers of making regulations with respect to proceedings, and with respect to interim executions, whilst appeals were pending; and also to issue a commission to ascertain in what case it might be proper to establish a trial by jury. With respect to this mode of trial, his lordship observed, that he had been upbraided out of doors with using language upon this subject which he had never applied to it; he joined in all those eulogiums which had been passed upon the trial by jury, and to which, in this country, he felt that we owed our happiness and our liberty; but it did not follow that it was equally applicable to Scotland; nor was it a politic or proper mode of proceeding to force that mode of trial upon a country where, in civil cases, its benefits were not understood or appreciated. He thought it would require considerable deliberation and caution to ascertain to what cases the trial by jury might be properly applied. With respect to the bill, he wished it to be committed before toe recess; but that the house should not stand committed by the amendments then made, and therefore that the bill should be recommitted after the recess.
§ Lord Grenvillestill thought that it would be better to divide the court of session into three chambers, than two. Upon a subject of this nature, he thought it was the preferable mode to consult the interests of those to whom justice was to be administered, rather than the opinion of those by whom it was administered, however re- 1346 spectable; as the latter were liable to be actuated on such a subject, by prejudices which he would denominate laudable prejudices, but which would, nevertheless, stand in the way of that complete measure which was wanted. With respect to trial by jury, he thought there ought to be a stronger recommendation of it in the bill than there was at present, a stronger indication of the opinion of the legislature in its favour.
Lord Melvillereferred to an opinion of lord Mansfield, respecting a proposition, to introduce gradually the trial by jury in civil cases into Scotland, and observed, that after the doubts expressed upon this subject by that eminent lawyer, he might well hesitate with respect to the policy of introducing that mode of trial into Scotland. He thought that the recommendation of that mode of trial in the bill was already rather too strong.
The Earl of Lauderdalewas unwilling to enter into any discussion of the general merits of the bill, after the understanding of their lordships as to the proper time. Still, he could not assent to the changes which had taken place in the present bill, from that submitted to the house on a former occasion. It was intended, that the two chambers of the court of session should not sit at the same time. This he considered unnecessary, or rather improper, because, it was to be remembered, that the great proportion of business in actions in that court, was chiefly done in writing; and, therefore, the time of the judges, whose presence daily was not wanting, would be much better employed in reading the pleadings on the various causes upon which they would be subsequently called upon to pronounce judgment. The noble lord thought there was not that necessity for caution and circumspection so much recommended. This measure had obtained the fullest investigation of almost every description of people in Scotland. It was debated ably and fully in that house; and, therefore, as the evil of the present system was acknowledged, the reformation and remedy ought to be prompt and efficient. The bill was then read a second time.