The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-06-21 00:00:00

composed of fifteen, and questions were decid-
e the majority. so that a man might be condemned
eight of his Jury, though seven of them considered
innocent. The Juries were taken from Edinburgh
adjoining counties, sod were, be believed. r.
most conscientiously by the present officer. The
iitf of earl' county sent • list of forty-five .larors to
officer, and from these forty five were selected, from
client the Judge nominated, the Juicy. When this no-
mination took place in the Sheriffs' Court he Wall the
'teturniog Officer. Solicitor, Nominator and Judge. The
homer bad no right of challenge in either of the
- unless be chewed special tense to be decided
the Judge. There was no provision against the
prejudice, infamy of character, or political ran-
The measure, however, which he proposed, went
deprive the Judge of the power of nomination,
substitute a ballot; and also to give the Pri-
a limited power of peremptory challenge.
bad abstained from pressing this measure on the
nsiderat ion of Parliament, while Scotland was agitated ;
be had hoped that his conduct on this occasion
have been considered free from bleine. He had
first instance, stated to the Learned Lord the
of the Bill, and ooderstood that there would be
ijeetion to introducing them into a general mea-
He did not mean to say, that the Learned Lord
t a right to oppose the Bill, even notwithstanding
cumstance • but the Learned Lord bad issued a
manifesto to the Scotch counties in contemplation of a
-eeting of those counties, which took place every April.
Hon. Member here referred to the manifesto dis-
approving of the Bill. and submitting it for the consi-
deration of the counties.] This letter was addressed to
sheriff, who was himself a judicial officer, and a
to to the question. The consequence was, that many
petitions were presented to the House against the Bill.
These petitions, in general, echoed the tone of the Leven-
' Lord's manifesto. The burthen of each petition was,
excellence of the criminal law of Scotland. lie re-
ed that law; but because he wished to correct a
blemish.in it, be did not think it was fair to ac-
him of a desire to undermine it. The same sort of
talent was offered against the Bill for extending the
law to Seistland. It was contended that this
in contravention of the Articles of Union ; but

would not waste the time of the House in opposing
Jai an argument. The Hon. Member, after some other
. ions in support of the Bill, proceeded to state
revel instances of abuse under the present system of]
swing Judges to name the Jury. In particular he
;erred to a conviction obtained againstoneof the Earls
-•rvIl„ which was afterwards declared void by the
At Parliament, and to another case which occurred
five or six years ago, wherein a Sheriff, newly en•
into office, had named a Jury in exact compliance
• suggestion of one of the officers of his court, in
ience of which the accused was convicted. The
. rase he was ready to prove at the Bar of the Houses
necessary, though at present he would not mention
names of the individuals connected with it. He now
to a case to which he alluded with considerable
—he meant that of a late trial in Scotland—(Hear,
!)—conducted, lie admitted, with greet honour and
irtiality. In the course of that trial, however, cir-
stances were elicited which he thought it oecessary
tate to the House. It appeared from a letter which
produced, that a Judge of tbeCourt in which the trial
place, had been consulted on the subject leading to
inhappy affair which was the subject of the.trial.—
great propriety this Judge kept sway from the
circumstance which sheaved that be considered
disqualified by his own conduct to sit as Judge
z occasion. Yet bad the trial taken place at one
Circuits, it might have been before this very
, who on that occasion would have had the norm-
of the Jury to try the accused.—(Cheers from the
ition.) lie alluded to this trial with considerable
inctance ; but he stated this among other cireum-
uces, in answer to the triumphant cases which bad
made upon him, to state any abases under the pre-
system. The measure which be proposed to re-
Ike law on this subject, gave the prisoner an equal
to peremptory challenge with the prasecutor to
—e extent of two each. He must beg the attention of
the house to the distinction betwixt the decision of the

, Jury and the English Jury, the latter delivering
unanimous verdict, and the former giving their de-
by majority.—(Hear.) By this regulation, that
A of discussion which was so salutary in the ease
abridjury consulting on their verdict was in all cases
ged, by as much as the majority fell short of the
e number. Besides which, the verdict frequently
determined by a casting vote, it was plain that the
man might be voted away by his known and
enemy.—(flear.)-1t was also too much matter
notoriety how, and by whom every individual jury
-4 be constituted. He was satisfied of the imperfect
ser io which he had explained this matter ; but he
esl 'be might look forward to this measure laying the
indation of a complete revision of the Criminal Law
'-otland. The lion. Member concluded by moving

second reading of the Scotch Juries Bill. -
LORD ADVOCATE observed that it was a good
in jurisprudence to make no alteration in eats-
_ systems not pointed- out by defects in practise.
house had acted upon the ;lissom on a late motion
allow Counsel to prisoners tried for their liras; and
hoped the Members of this country would allow the
4i people to have the benefit of the same practice.
the ;revisions of the Hon. Member's Bill were not
for by the people of Scotland, be was convinced,
• the house had seen nothing to induce it to think
therwise. He certainly had requested the Hon. Mem-
- to wait till such time as the votes of the people'
be collected, and fur that purpose he had written
circular quoted by the lion. Member. Ile was the
• persuaded to take that course from complaints
been made that measures passed that house rela-
y Scotland, of which that county beard Dodds
passed; and in sending the Bill to them heeeslahsly
bound to communicate his opinion, although he had
desire of influencing them. The Gentlemen of Scot-
were from this charge, both on its own w-
and &omits connection with the Criminal Law of
miry. lie maintained that the system of Criminal
Scotland was as faultless as that of any country.
,arit of it was to check the progress of crime, and
mercifully with criminals under trial; and the dif-
See in the amount of crime, ander that system, be-
t England and Scotland, were as 233 to 18 in, favour
he latter. He bad listened with great attention to
instances of ablke in the nomination of juries detailed
• Hon. Gentleman ; bat he did not hank any thing
A stated wit_ild warrant the alteration proposed by
measure. With respect to the case of misconduct
-I to by the Hon, sentleman in a certain Sheriff,
he could say was, that if he would inform him
individilal, Ise ahbuld be dealt with by the law.
• regard to the allusion of the Hoo. Gentleman to
conduct of aa iadividnal Judge in a late trial, be
ast observe, that not being able to see what connection
. °add have with the question of nominating juries, he
did not think it was In very good taste to introduce the
mention of it. That Hon. Individual was closely allied
object of the trial, and there was nothing extraor-
, la his having given the advice it appeared he bad
, and there was no reason to suppose that be would
acted with less delicacy had the trial occurred is
. own district. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
proceeded to take a review of the mode of selecting ju-
Scotland. He did not see there was any sacs.-
.y for giving the prisoner the rights of peremptory
challenge, glace there never was a ease in which the sag-
' of counsel relative to any juror was ass.stteadisi

Omni
Jury wao
rd 1w tho
i • hir eight
Aim nine
and the A
!revel ino
Sheriff o
the other
wholes th
misation
• 'Wavily
' Prisoner
Courts, i
upon by
effect c;f ,
cer. VI
only.to •
and to a
..fner a
flr had
I oongidrn
o sod hr
would hi
in the t
heads of
no ohjee
!lir,. II
hail not I
this fire
, manifesto
tolortinir
[The He
opprovio
deration
each she
party to
petitions
if hese pe
cal Lord',
I the excel
netted t
Might blo
11,
si
cube him
argnmen
treason I.
Bill was
~ he would
I such ant
•
S oboe aaaa i
several it
i allowing
referred I
i
a of ArFyll
Scottish
shoot fire
a weal into
with the
• conseque
• Later vas
• o if neerss
• the name
came to
,
,
.
I . pain—he
hoar!)—,
impartial
euinlitanc
I'
to state t,
was prod,
took plac
. the oohs]
With gre
trial, a ci
hs was di
on that o
t of the Ci
- • .Torolgr, ti
'wino of
oppnsitio
reluctant
, o stances, i
• been mat
sent aye'
wetly the
edit to
, t 1' the extet
. 1 • -- the betas
Scotch J
1 aye unani
.
1 , • cision b 3
extent of
1 of a ury
abridged
whole nt
I Istiog de
• life of a
1 avowed
of notor
. was to bi
, manner
' • hoped do
1,• fonndati,
of Scott
1 ... the secoi
i i
5, • The I
maxim i
a f blished i
That ho
• '! ‘,
• to allow
i
he hopes
1 Scotch i
..• '''',';
'I i That till
called fa
and the
otherwit
ber to sl,
could be
the circa
I • more pi
• 1• having I
'..
t live to
i,
till peso
was bon,
no desir
, r . laud wet
l''. •.: li
ii• count at
the cotes
Law in
• 1 The spit
oL deal met
feresce
~
twist Er
, of the I
, . . •
the lost
Qa
by the I
be had i
this twee
alluded
all that
i'l , 1/4 .of the il
; ; Witb re
• I' the coal
4
• mat els
it mold
did sot I
mention
, to the of
• dloary I;
.. r gine, a
-..,t,, ; ve
,), , ha act
1 ' his own
k•
' •-• prceedi
, nails
sky for ,
1.
. eltallmq
gestiool
• Ii .
'. t;!
' t Ilkliiik