170 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1809. 



period from 1802 to 180S. It 

 »-a* understood that it would be 

 difficult to procure returns farther 

 back. The first motion, referring 

 to the scTcra] gradations between 

 committal, conviction, and execu- 

 tion, which could not be made 

 out, was withdrawn. The second 

 motion was for the number trans- 

 ported to New South Wales, and 

 the period of sentence from their 

 embarkation. The third, for a re- 

 turn of the number who died be- 

 fore the period of sentence expired, 

 or before they were embarked. 

 These two last motions were agreed 

 to. — Mr. Horner expressed his 

 hope that the bouse would feel it- 

 self pledged seriously to consider 

 this subject ; and particularly how 

 far the experiment of transporta- 

 tion upon our criminal law bad 

 been successful. 



House of Lords, June 6. — The 

 Lord Chancellor moved for the 

 third reading of the bill to afford 

 fiirther time for the commissioners 

 to report upon the judicature of 

 Scotland; which, after a great 

 deal of conversation about the 

 monstrous expense of lawsuits in 

 Scotland and trial by jury, was 

 read a third time accordingly. 



Lord Grenville was greatly 

 struck by a fact stated in the re- 

 port of the commissioners : the 

 gross and scandalously anomaly in 

 judicial proceedings, by which per- 

 sons, who had obtained the sen- 

 tence of the court of session in 

 their favour, were yet, before they 

 could reap the consequent benefits, 

 ccmpeiied to get a copy of the sen- 

 tence, or as it was in Scotland le- 

 gally expressed, " an extract of the 

 <iecreeU" In one case, that deed 

 or document cost an individual 

 1,200/. ; and in another case, where 



the whole property in question did 

 not exceed 500/., the charge for 

 such copy was above SOO/. He had 

 drawn up a bill on this subject, for 

 the relief of suitors in the court of 

 session in Scotland, which he was 

 about to propose to their lordships; 

 and he should conduct his persever- 

 ance in the measure, agreeably to 

 the sense of the house manifested 

 on the present occasion. He con- 

 cluded by moving, that the bill 

 be read a first time. To this the 

 Lord Chancellor consented. Al- 

 luding to an observation of lord 

 Grenville, he admitted, that law- 

 yers should not have a greater 

 share in legislation than other 

 peers. But he could not help ob- 

 serving, that there never was a 

 lawyer who did not fancy himself a 

 statesman, and that there never was 

 a statesman who did not fancy him- 

 self a lawyer. He « as of opinion, 

 that the introduction of trial by 

 jury in civil cases would not an- 

 swer the expectations of those who 

 most contended for the measure. 

 It reminded him of a conversation 

 on the subject between two very 

 learned persons in the north. The 

 one asked the other by what 

 means he would introduce trial by 

 jury ? Nothing more easy : make 

 an act of parliament for its intro- 

 duction. The first replied in his 

 northern dialect, " My friend, if 

 an act of parliament were passed 

 to make us speak English, I 

 believe we should still speak 

 Scotch." 



House of Commons, June 13.— 

 Lord Binning brought up the re- 

 port from the committee on the 

 Scotch judicature bill. Mr. Horner 

 spoke at considerable length oa 

 the evil for which lord Grenville 

 had proposed a remedy in the 



House 



