The Ideal State 249 



bility what will happen 'will be, that if I win my case 

 before the Lord Ordinary of the Court of Session, my 

 rich opponent will pursue the case before the Outer 

 Division of the Court. Suppose I win again : he 

 appeals to the Inner Division. I win again. He ap- 

 peals to the House of Lords, where for various reasons 

 Scots decisions seem to be more often overturned than 

 confirmed. As the result of this appeal, I lose my case ; 

 at last, finding the decision against me, I am told there 

 is no appeal for me. I, the poor man, am ruined, and 

 my rich opponent is happy, by means of his greater 

 riches, in having smashed me, notwithstanding the fact 

 that I have won in three courts to his one. It must be 

 evident that there is neither sense nor justice in such 

 methods. There is only gain to the members of the 

 Bar, at the expense of every innate principle of right 

 and common sense. The feeling is increasing that 

 money is the only essential to winning a case in the long 

 run, and is almost certain to win if the opponent is 

 a poor man. 



From the point of view of common sense, and keeping 

 in mind the hypothetical case just given, let us consider 

 what the law is — it is a series of Acts of Parliament in 

 conformity with which men and bodies of men must act, 

 as subjects of the realm. The Lord Justices or Senators 

 of the College of Justice are appointed on account of 

 their wide knowledge of these Acts. That being so, we 

 hold that one judgment should suffice and no appeal be 

 allowed. The appeal is always made in the hope of a 

 different view being taken by another judge as to the 

 meaning or purport of the Act involved. Our senators 

 are not slow to uphold the diverse views of members of 

 the medical profession in matters of expert opinion to 

 ridicule. They always appear to me to be quite 

 oblivious of the fact that if it were not for such diverse 

 views in the vast majority of cases in regard to the 



