Might not the Judge likewife as well be entrufted to decide concerning the evidence of the fact? For, by a latitude of construction, he might bring the fact within the severity of the law, contrary to the fenfe of the legislature; or, by a confined expofition, he might reftrain it, to the hindrance of justice.

Thus the life and liberty of the fubject might depend on the decifion of one man, who might poffibly, in fome cafes, be more likely to be biaffed than twelve Jurors, totally indifferent to the parties concerned, who are sworn to give a true verdict, and muft do it under the peril of a heavy punishment, and whofe duty it is to state their doubts and difficulties, if any fhould occur, for the advice of the court. Is there not lefs to be appréhended from the occafional mistakes of judgment in twelve fuch Jurors, than the poffible error of judgment or of will in the Judge, who, whatever be his knowledge or probity, is but a man?

Befides, it does not, in fact, often happen, that the Jury difregard the directions

or

or advice of the Judge. The opinion of the bench has generally its due weight; and, though Juries now and then give erroneous verdicts, contrary to the opinion of the court, yet their error may in most cases be rectified; and where it is remedilefs, it is the leffer inconvenience of the two.

Though the practice of punishing a Jury by attaint for bringing in a verdict contrary to evidence, has of late years been difufed, yet, in civil cafes, a method more effectual to redress the wrong has been fubftituted, which is that of making application to the court, who, according to the circumftances, will grant a new trial. So that the party injured by their wrong finding, is not without a remedy.

If their wrong verdict indeed respects a criminal matter, a failure of juftice in one inftance feems unavoidable: for if they acquit the guilty prifoner, he cannot be brought to trial again for the fame offence; but should they condemn him wrongfully, the cafe is not altogether without a remedy; L 3

for

for the court of King's Bench may grant a new trial, and our conftitution has wifely lodged a power in the Crown to remit the fentence.

CHA P. XII.

Of the Divifion of Courts.

W

HILE the concerns of mankind moved within a a narrow fphere, while their wants were few, their traffic fmall, their ideas of the relative duties of life imperfect, and their notions of political diftinctions crude, their fyftem of laws might have been, without inconvenience, fimple and fummary.

But as improvements and refinements increased their wants, as trading and commercial intercourfe extended, as they acquired more enlarged ideas of the reciprocal duties arifing from the various natural connections between man and man, as they became fenfible of the neceffity of establish

ing

ing and maintaining the political degrees of pre-eminence and fubordination, every progreffion towards improvement must confequently have increased the volume of their laws.

As people multiply, and the subjects of property become more various, the modes of acquiring, maintaining, and transferring each diftinct fubject must increase in proportion. Amidst fuch extenfive intercourse likewise the temptations to injuftice and dishonesty will increase, and laws muft be provided against every rising species of injustice and oppreffion.

As every civilized nation must have a fense of religion, and perceive the neceffity of fuperadding divine obligations to strengthen human institutions, hence again arifes a principal object of legislative attention.

In short, the growing multiplicity and infinite variety of concerns, which daily evolved as fociety ripened by civil institutions, muft evince the expedience of claffing and

and diftinguishing the various objects of jurifprudence, and of appropriating different courts for the cognizance of distinct fubjects of jurifdiction.

It would not only be impoffible for the fame Judges to attend to fuch an endlefs diversity of caufes, but the judgments concerning each, often depending on different princi ples, muft in fome cafes unavoidably occafion a confufion and repugnance in their de cifions.

Thus, in time, the boundaries between civil and criminal, and other various fubjects of jurifdiction, were afcertained: And thus, as religion extended its facred influence, its minifters claimed peculiar regard, various rights were annexed to their holy function, and feveral fpecies of offence against the Divine Law were referred to the cognizance of ecclefiaftical courts,

As the power of the fupreme magiftrate became more extenfive and better fecured, many rights and emoluments were annexed

to