THE SCOTTISH LAW MAGAZINE AND SHERIFF COURT REPORTER. OBSERVATIONS ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL LAW IN SCOTLAND. BY HUGH BARCLAY, Esq., LL.D., SHERIFF-SUBSTITUTE OF PERTH. (Continued from page 20.) ONE ancient aggravation in Scottish law, it is pleasant to observe, has fallen considerably into disuse in later years. This was the anomalous charge of "habit and repute a thief." A trifling theft, which would have been made a police charge and visited by a short imprisonment, was raised to the standard of a capital offence by this strange addition. Many a person has suffered on the gibbet for this charge against character, founded too on the opinion of police officers. It did not matter that the person had never been convicted or charged with theft; nevertheless, if he was out of employment, and in the opinion of the police officers an undetected thief, though by giving such evidence they proclaimed their own inefficiency, he was held to be a thief of the highest grade, and as such subject to the severest punishment of the law. Baron Hume (vol. 1, p. 92, Bell's Edit.) speaks in the highest praise of this crime of character. He calls it "that most reasonable, as well as useful rule, according to “which a single act of theft is holden for capital if it is "the act of a common thief (fur famosus), one who is "reckoned and held as habit and repute (according to "our phrase for it) to be one of that calling, and to make "or help his livelihood by thieving. In such a case, when the man's general character and way of life has been duly established, the particular act comes to be "considered as a confirmation only and a detected in"stance of his daily course of evil, and the punishment is justly proportioned to the habits and calling of the man as a trained thief and a common nuisance to the country. Indeed, in older and more disorderly times, so high was the regard paid to this article of common "brait and fame, that one who stood convicted of it by an inquest, and could find none to answer for him, was on that one ground to be held as a proven thief or robber, "and to be disposed of accordingly." Burnett, one of Our early criminal commentators, reprobated the practice of proving habit and repute by the opinion of officers of police. Mr Burnett in his treatise, published in 1810, marked that the evidence of neighbours or those friends acquainted with the prisoner is better and less exceptional than the testimony of inferior officers of the ; as thief-catchers, and such like, who have oftenes an interest, and in most instances a bias against the prisoner." The remarks of Sir Archibald Alison on the passage are somewhat remarkable. "The obervation of Mr Burnett," says Sir Archibald Alison (vol. p. 297), "that the evidence of police-officers on this paint is not so worthy of credit as that of the neigh bou of the pannel, only proves how rapid has been the 66 progress of vice in this kingdom since the composition of "this work; for the depraved habits, irregular life, and "constant change of domicile of the professional thieves of "the present day are such as to render it equally impos"sible to say who are their neighbours, as to find persons " among their associates upon whose testimony any re"liance can be placed. In truth, the only persons, except those of their own gang, who keep their eyes upon "them and can speak from personal knowledge of their "profession and avocations, are the police-officers, into "whose hands they frequently come on charges of theft; "and whose business leads them to be in a peculiar manner conversant with their habits." As Burnett published in 1810, and Sir Archibald Alison in 1835, the rapid increase of crime in this brief interval is somewhat startling. Nevertheless the opinion of Burnett was disregarded, and for years almost every indictment for theft had this proverbial addition of habit and repute, or as it was elegantly endorsed on the indictments "hab. and rep." Twelve months previous to the time of charge were held adequate to affix the unenviable character. În more cases than one, police officers have been found to affix this character, when, in point of fact, the unfortunate man was for the whole twelve months an inmate of a prison, where his habit should at all events have been restrained, though his repute, no doubt, might exist in all its pristine integrity. There are one or two points in the constitution of crime which are well worthy of notice. The degree of crime is often not regulated by the animus or intent of the accused, in which consists the true essence of crime, but by the mere accidental consequence or contingent results. For example, a thief makes an exploratory invasion of the pocket of a lady or gentleman in a crowd. He is as ignorant as a navigator when he approaches an island, whether it is to prove a barren coral reef or an auriferous land-a second Ophir. If the furtive act brings up no booty, the court at length have found that any attempt to steal amounts to no offence. (15 Dec. 1858, Ure. 3, Jurist, 10.) If he is successful in filching a few pence, or shillings, or it may be pounds, the offence is a mere matter of police, and the punishment is thirty or sixty days' imprisonment at the utmost. But if by the merest chance in this lottery there is brought up from the deep and dirty pocket of some southern cattle dealer bank notes, to the amount of hundreds, the crime ascends in the scale to a furtum grave, at one time expiated on the gibbet, and now by penal servitude for a long period. Take another example. A person with most deadly malice D bits a blow intended to be fatal, but fortunately it falls on some fleshy portion of the body of his victim, and a fine of 5s or 10s meets the offence; but another less fortunate, and half in frolic, hits a random blow which rests on some more vulnerable portion of the body, or perchance the body is diseased at the time; or the person, half by the force of the blow and half by the effects of alcohol, stumbles and falls on a stone or stair and factures a bone, perhaps he dies; then the case assumes the formidable shape of an indictment for murder, culpable homicide, or aggravated assault, and being tried before the Justiciary, a lengthened sentence of imprisonment or penal servitude is imposed on the culprit. Here, and in other instances which could be mentioned, the person is made to suffer not so much for the actual crime as for the unforeseen and accidental consequences thereof. Under this branch we venture to question the rules which regulate trials of persons committing crimes under the stupefaction of drink There is somewhat of the ridiculous in discussing the volitions, motives, and actions of beings that have voluntarily reduced themselves to mere machines, or lumps of inert matter, wholly beyond the power of volition of any kind. Thus we find assaults committed without any reasonable motive what ever, often on the nearest and dearest friends, or on persons utterly unknown, and thefts of articles wholly valueless, and which seemed to have been appropriated by persons all unconscious of what they were doing. No doubt drunkenness can form no legal excuse for crime. But the Greeks were more sensible, when they punished the man first for getting drunk and next for the crime committed when drunk. Our practice is to charge the offence as one maliciously and wilfully done; whereas on the evidence it is often proved that there was a total negation of malice or will, and a mere outburst of physical or rather brute power under the influence of strong drink, which for the time had obliterated all that distinguishes the man from the beast. previous declarations must be read over, and the caution repeated. But the unfairness of these declarations remains to be seen at the trial. The prosecutor uniformly libels the declaration as to be used in evidence against the accused, for which purpose it is lodged with the clerk of court previous to trial, that it may be seen by the counsel or agent for the accused. But, nevertheless, it is in the power of the prosecutor to produce it to the jury or to withhold it. The declaration must either be admitted or proved by two witnesses to be that of the accused, freely and voluntarily emitted after the usual caution given. If, at the close of the examination of the witnesses, it appears that the declaration is thereby contradicted, the prosecutor generally asks it to be read to the jury. If, on the contrary, the statement given by the prisoner is thereby borne out, then it is withheld, and the accused cannot call for it. If the accused avail himself of his privilege and decline to answer questions, then the empty declaration (if such it can be called) is read with the comment that no innocent person would refuse to answer questions. If he does answer questions, then his contradictions are pointed out, and even the very words are criticised with minuteness more applicable to a literary production than the mere statement of a criminal. It i said, and doubtless with some force of truth, that the de claration is found useful in leading the precognition to show the innocence of the party by tracing out the story he tells by further precognition. But if it be so in tended, why should it be withheld from the jury in an case? It is said that though the prosecutor gives a lis of witnesses, he is not bound to call and examine then all, but may select those he pleases, and he may deal i the same way with the declaration of the prisoner. Bu the answer is obvious. It is in the power of the accuse to call in exculpation any of the witnesses on the Crow list, and why ought not he to have the same advantag with the declaration which has been libelled to be brough as evidence against him? The contrast of the Englis practice with ours is more favourable to the humanit One most important distinction exists between the and fairness of our southern neighbours. It is not le practice of England and Scotland with reference to what to common law, but has been embodied in statute. Th is called the declaration of the accused. The accused following is the clause from the Act 11 and 12 Vic. c. 4 party is brought up under a warrant for examination. Sec. 18, 1848:-"And be it enacted: That after th He is examined in private, being previously denied all "examination of all the witnesses, on the part of th access to friends or agents. The magistrate is bound to "prosecution as aforesaid, shall have been complete tell him the charge, and to mention that he is not obliged "the justice of the peace or one of the justices, to answer any questions or make any statement; and "or before whom such examination shall have been whatever he does say of his own free will is to be taken "completed as aforesaid, shall, without the attendan down in writing, which may be read over as evidence "of the witnesses, read or cause to be read to t against him at his trial. There is a difference of practice" accused the depositions taken against him, and sha as to stating the charge. Some magistrates read over to the accused the charge as contained in the prosecutor's petition; others state it specially; but some carelessly state it in general terms, as theft, assault, or other crime, without any specification. The fiscal then puts the questions from the information or precognition, and frequently the questions are put in a leading manner, showing the accused that the whole affair is known to the authorities, and thus it is needless to deny the matter. The declaration is of necessity taken down more in the language assented to than by any actual statement by the prisoner. It is easy to perceive how a timid person may thus be completely led into statements which he really did not mean, and which are not consistent with fact. After the declaration is taken, the accused may be committed for further examination, and under this warrant detained in prison without right to demand bail in bailable offences, and without permission to be visited by friends or agents. The period of this secluded imprisonment, unfortunately, has not been fixed by statute, but in custom has been held to extend to eight days, a term much too long, where the person may ultimately be liberated without commitment for trial. A second and even a third declaration may be taken, in which case the 66 'say to him these words or words to the like effe "Having heard the evidence, do you wish to say an "thing in answer to the charge? You are not oblig "to say anything unless you desire to do so; but wha "ever you say will be taken down in writing, and m "be given in evidence against you upon your tria "and whatever the prisoner shall then say in answer the "to shall be taken down in writing and read over to hi "and shall be signed by the said justice or justices and ke "with the depositions of the witness, and shall be tra "mitted with them as herein-after mentioned, and afte "wards, upon the trial of the said accused person, the sa "may, if necessary, be given in evidence against him wit "out further proof thereof, unless it shall be proved th "the justice or justices purporting to sign the same, did n "in fact, sign the same: Provided always, that the s "justice or justices, before such person accused shall ma "any statement shall state to him and give him clearly "understand that he has nothing to hope from any prom "of favour, and nothing to fear from any threat wh "may have been holden out to him to induce him to ma "any admission or confession of his guilt; but that wh "ever he shall then say, may be given in evidence agai "him upon his trial, notwithstanding such promise "threat; Provided, nevertheless, that nothing herein "enacted or contained shall prevent the prosecutor in "any case from giving in evidence any admission or con"fession or other statement of the person accused or "charge made at any time, which by law, would be ad"missible as evidence against such person." occasional service of jurors may be reasonably admitted beyond the age of sixty. The difference in the number of jurors between the two sections of the common country is worthy of notice. It is remarkable that whilst in England the judges were twelve, so were the jurors, and in Scotland the old fifteen In France and most of the Continental States the judges of Session were accompanied with the like number accused is examined publicly in court and before the of jurors in criminal cases. The number of judges in jury. England have been increased, and in Scotland they have Fortunately, our law, with some appearance of in- been diminished; but the standard of juries remains the consistency, distrusts the declaration; and, therefore, same. The practice in England is uniform, but in Scotthough that writing may contain a full confession of the land there is the strange anomaly that in criminal cases crime, unless it receives corroboration by witnesses, it is fifteen is the number of jurors, whilst in civil cases twelve justly rejected both by judge and jury, and it is now not is the rule. In the former, a verdict by a majority is uncommon to hear of verdicts of acquittal where the sufficient; in the latter, until lately, unanimity was essenpannel admitted the offence fully in his declaration. tial, which has now been modified to a majority of threeNevertheless, it is well known that in cases of doubtful fourths, or nine out of twelve, but only after being enevidence the statements of the accused in his declaration closed for three hours. (17 and 18 Vict. c. 59 (1854), 22 go far to influence the jury. To us it appears not far and 23 Vict. c. 8 (1859). This is a decided improvement removed from the ancient system of torture, which had in our law, not yet adopted in England, where still the the significant name of the "question;" and we think the strength of stomach is placed in opposition to that of day is not far distant when the more humane system of conscience, and he who can hold out longest against the England will be introduced, and the prisoner, after hear-cravings of the former can establish himself master of the ing the evidence against him, be allowed to make or not consciences of his less abstemious brethren. to make a statement as he chooses, and no searching artificial questions by a skilful legalist be permitted. There remains some important questions with reference to the constitution of the jury-their unanimity and the form of their verdict. As to the qualification, there appears but one opinion, that the standard of qualification is too low. In Scotland it is fixed by 6 George IV. c. 22 (1825) for common jurors being proprietors in fee or lifereat of heritage of the yearly value of £5, or being owners of £200 in moveables-the ascertainment of the atter qualification being the mere guess of the comer of the jury lists. The exceptions, embracing all the learned professions, and under the class of commissioners of income-tax (for what reason it is impossible to divine) he majority of our country gentlemen are exempt from serving. On the one hand, there is thus exempted, the very best and most experienced classes from a duty they are so well calculated to perform. On the other ad, at every circuit entreaties come from poor men who have the misfortune to inherit a £5 house, with a corresponding amount of heritable debt attached thereto, peading absolute poverty as an excuse for not sojourning at their own expense at the circuit town. Indigence was at one time a recognised objection, but now it only forms Found of excuse which our judges are very reluctant Low. It fell to my lot, very recently, to address a trying criminals, and, after an interval of a few months, to have the same person in the dock before a jury charged with theft from lock fast places. The distinct between special and general jurors is very illusory, and is of very doubtful expediency. There will be Sound in the first rank of the privileged five persons, e whose right to be there is more than doubtful, e there are others in the remaining classes as well or better entitled to be in the front rank. The purse is ade the sole gauge or index of the intellect or judgment. But every day's experience teaches that such is not always an infallible guide. When the Irish Parliament deliberating what landed qualifications were requisite ra justice of the peace, a member gravely inquired if re was any rule of mental arithmetic which disclosed many acres it required to make a wiseacre. It is matter well worthy of consideration whether the of sixty is not too low as the maximum age for ervice, and whether five or even ten years more ght not give an increase of men of greater experience, any of whom, retired from the battle of life, would bring the calm serenity of mature judgment to the administraon of criminal justice. We have octogenerian judges on bench in the full vigour of intellect, and surely the One peculiarity exists in Scotland in the three divisions of verdicts-guilty, not guilty, and not proven. The advantage is decidedly with the two alternatives of England. If a charge be not proved the accused is entitled to be acquitted and not have the brand attached to his future fame and fortune, that the jury acquitted him not being innocent but merely for want of proof of his guilt; but the far more serious effect of this mid-course is that it affords a door of escape to timid jurors for avoiding a determination on the evidence. They are not prepared to acquit or convict. Doubts have been suggested to their minds, and instead of calmly seeking to examine these doubts and to remove or resolve them on one side or another, they hastily cut the knot they do not even venture to untie, and split the difference and give what is no verdict, affirmative or negative, but an evasion of the issue altogether. In civil suits where the pursuer fails to prove his claim the defender is at once assoilzied from the suit. It is not easy to perceive why a similar principle ought not to prevail in our criminal courts. One effect of this mode of verdict is detrimental to public morals. The question generally put in case of any criminal charge is no longer is the charge true or is the accused guilty, but can the charge be proved? Let them prove it, is a common saying in the mouths of the multitude, including some of whom better things might be expected. So long as circuits remain there is a great defect in having no mode of appeal, or power to reserve points of difficulty. This remedy exists in England, and has produced a uniform and well-settled code and line of procedure in the minutest points, in all criminal courts down even to that of the justices. The English court of criminal appeal is regulated by the 11 and 12 Vict. c. 78. By that statute, where any person is convicted by any criminal court, including justices of the peace, the court may reserve any point of law for the superior courts on a case of facts stated. In the High Court of Justiciary, where cases from the three Lothians and Orkney and Shetland can alone be tried, and where cases from all Scotland may and are occasionally tried, though sometimes, and especially, from the first-named counties cases of small importance, three judges are necessary to form a quorum, though, unfortunately, these are often shifted. To each circuit two judges are allotted, but occasionally only one judge attends. In this way questions of evidence and practice are frequently ruled in opposite ways, the same year, at different circuits, and there exists with us no mode of reconcilement. The judges at circuit have the power of certifying entire cases to the High Court on questions of relevancy or as to the proper punishment. But this is a power seldom exercised. They have no power as in England to reserve points of evidence arising during trial. Such a difficulty arose in course of a trial for murder in Inverness. The jury on the clearest evidence found a woman and man guilty of the murder of the husband of the one and the father of the other. The judges, instead of passing sentence of death, certified the case to the High Court, with the view of obtaining a decision on a matter of evidence, as a reserved point. It is very doubtful if such point could in any way have been taken up. But because they had not fixed a particular day for the case being called on at Edinburgh (all criminal diets being fixed and peremptory), the proceeding was found irregular, and the two convicted murderers allowed to escape from all punishment. (Fraser, 1 Irvine, 1 & 66.) The opinion of Lord Cockburn as to the necessity of some such mode of review, from the hasty decisions at circuit, may be given in his Lordships most quaint and racy language. "No judge's head is always clear, or his memory always loaded with a full and accessible cargo of authorities. Brevity is the only tolerated virtue. The judge attempts to quash the bar by a sudden show of apparent know ledge, and the bar strains to paralyse him by precedents which, on the instant, he cannot appreciate, or sophistry which he cannot at once detect. Ammunition is looked for in the arsenal of the adjoining library, and should a learned pundit chance to appear, he is like to be torn to pieces for an opinion by both sides. All this only thickens the cauldron. The poor distressed judge perspires and tries to look wise and easy. But he can do nothing, and groans inwardly when the bar at length stops. Compelled then to do something, he first makes a struggle to evade deciding, which failing, he endeavours to escape behind some general maxim, which, all failing, he relieves himself by a desperate plunge, and decides, conscious, however, that he perhaps would have been as right if he had decided exactly the opposite way."-Edinburgh Review, January, 1846. of escape and the wording of which often afforded means to convicted criminals, are now susperseded by oral verdicts. The lengthy and most unavailing address to the accused often embracing startling propositions in theology is now entirely abandoned, and the lengthy sentence from the record is no longer read by the clerk Nevertheless, in the dispatch of business, the criminal courts of England are far beyond our measure. But it is ever to be recollected that justice is the end of these tribunals. It is a poor equivalent if justice be sacrificed. that time has been gained. "Strike but hear," is more than an Athenian cry. It is the watchword of justice. There ought ever to be the certainty that there be at least time for that grave deliberation which befits the consideration of questions involving the lives and liberties of the lieges, and therefore, in all respects, important to the commonwealth. By some it may be thought that the subject of crimina jurisprudence is as uninteresting as it is unprofitable to the legal profession. It is to be regretted that those whose talents and station fit them most for the study of the principles and the practice of criminal law, shun all ap pearance of connection with these courts. Young counse venture to spread their new-fledged wings at circuit, but speedily seek nobler flights and leave their vacant roost to each successive swarm. The juniors of the local bar are generally allowed to attend to the criminal depart ment of the courts with which they are connected. It i not so in the southern division of the land. Some who have risen and done honour to the Woolsack, won their early laurels in the Old Bailey and the police offices of the metropolis, and barristers of standing and eminence are not unwilling to appear, not only on the criminal sid of the assizes, but at the county quarter sessions. Ther is no field where the law of evidence and the nice balanc ing of circumstantial proof can be better learned. Ther is no sphere where the tone and feelings of society, from its highest surface to its lowest dregs, can be better dis covered, and many are the lessons of social philosoph which are there often pleasantly, but still more frequently painfully taught. But there are higher and more loft motives which ought to inspire the legal student, not t neglect the culture of the principles and practice of crimi Wherever it can possibly be given, it is wise that an accused party, in every case, have a short but sufficient statement in writing of the charges made against him given him before his trial, with sufficient time to pre-nal law. There is the noble object of shielding the op pare his defence. A summary arrest, and the accused placed at once at the bar with the charge for the first time stated against him ought, if possible, to be avoided. Such hasty procedure is quite unnecessary, and is pregnant with danger, and as such has been repeatedly reprobated by the Court of Justiciary in reviewing sentences of police courts. In England the right of appeal in all summary prosecutions is regulated by the statute 20 and 21 Vict. c. 43. Either party can demand a case on the facts and the law, to a superior court. The expense is very moderate, and the proceedings simple and summary. In Scotland the process of suspension is so costly that it is placed beyond the reach of the poor who are the most numerous class of persons who are brought within the jurisdiction of police law. Recent years have introduced great improvements in modifying the proceedings in trials, which produced dispatch without any sacrifice of justice. The indictment need no longer be read in court, and debates on the question of relevancy and long interlocutors thereon are no longer the rule. The evidence at one time was all recorded by the clerk at great length. Seldom do counsel now address the jury for the accused, and almost never for the prosecution. The judge shortly points out the leading facts of the case, and does not, as was once the case, read, or attempt to read, over his notes of the evidence as if the jury had not themselves heard the evidence as well as he, and many of them taken as full notes as the court; and which reading had the tendency to confuse rather than to elucidate. Written verdicts, sealed with the clement red wax, or the ominous black, pressed, defending the innocent, and redressing th wronged; and the assurance that even the vilest offende shall have a fair trial, and that if convicted and con demned, his guilt may be made apparent and law an justice vindicated. There is nothing which binds th people more to their country than the assurance the justice, stern and pure, is meted out with equal hand rich and poor, and nothing sooner spreads discontent the masses than any misgivings that such is not the actu fact, however vaunted in theory. In our humble opini this depends not so much in the zeal and ability of t public prosecutors, or in the sound sense and impartiali of judges and jurors, or the existence of nicely-order rules of procedure, as in the presence of an honourat and well-educated bar, ever watchful of the purity justice, and with a determination to uphold the digni and supremacy of law, by the stern performance their duties as advocates and agents for the peop and as such guardians of their liberties and privileg The judges are like the ancient oracles. They forth their responses. But the legal profession the priesthood of the law. To them belongs the paration of the offerings at the altar of Justice. depends on their ability, but still more on their integri whether the temple of Justice be kept sacred, or wheth by neglect on their part, it may be profaned and pro tuted to base purposes. It is no unmeaning say "Fiat Justitia, ruat cœlum," and the Romans evin their ideal of the end and object of all jurisprudence summing up their admirable code with the express words, "Salus Populi, Suprema Lez," THE SCOTTISH LAW MAGAZINE AND SHERIFF COURT REPORTER. PARLIAMENTARY NOTES. Or Legal Bills, apart from Political or Social mea- | Scotland, whether held by parties resident in Scotland sares, there have only been two, and we give copies or elsewhere, protests of bills or of promissory notes, of them in the present Number. These are the dispositions, assignations, or other conveyances of Moveable Property (Scotland) Bill, and the Church moveable or personal property or effects, assignations, Bill, introduced by Lord Belhaven. To the first we translations, and retrocessions, and also probative exdo not anticipate any objection, even from that tracts of all such deeds from the books of any comquarter where the change will be most felt. The petent Court; the word "assignation" shall also inridging of deeds affecting land has been carried, clude translations and retrocessions, and probative we think, very nearly to its utmost limits, notwith- extracts thereof; the words "moveable estate" shall standing the cry for farther abridgement, which is extend to and include all personal debts and obligasometimes heard beyond the profession; and to any tions, and moveable or personal property or effects of one who can remember, or who may have compared every kind. The mode of transferring or assigning the older with the more recent portion of a progress these classes of securities is by endorsing a few lines of writs, the change is very great, and ought to satisfy on the back of the security itself and having it rethe wishes of the most ardent law reformers. These corded, and, if thought desirable, to have it intimated reforms were carried out with the full concurrence either by a notary public or by the holder sending and assistance of the profession, although here and a copy of the assignment through the post office. there an objection was muttered, but ineffectually. In this instance at least has been realised the mercanThe contrast which always occurs to mercantile men tile idea of brevity, cheapness, and certainty; for we in transactions in landed securities, is the cheapness see no reason why any man may not endorse the few and simplicity with which they can have transfers of lines pointed out in the schedule to the Act for himstocks and goods, compared with bonds over landed self, make a copy thereof and send it by post, without etates and transfers of these securities. For a few the intervention of a lawyer; only lawyers will conBillings they can have stocks of thousands of pounds tinue to think that if the sum be large, few prudent transferred or assigned, while a bond or security for men will do this. Having reached this point, if the one or two hundred pounds cannot be assigned or Bill becomes law, the next step of still farther simtransferred for less than three or four times the plifying all securities over land or real property cannot anount. The contrast is no doubt striking, and be delayed very long, and the profession should be preLough the length of deeds of security may to law-pared to meet this new inroad on their emoluments. yers appear to rest on sufficient grounds, yet there | We hope they may exhibit the same spirit they have is no disguising the fact that these reasons are not appreciable by the times in which we live. People cannot be made to understand why a bond bearing interest should be encumbered with all the fems of feudal conveyancing, and why, if that security is to be discharged, a long and expensive deed should be required. We have no doubt the mercantile idea will more and more penetrate our land titles, and lawyers do not seem quite prepared to surrender, unless this bill of the Lord Advocate indicate A change; but we think the time is not far distant when this must be done. The object of the present ail is to facilitate the transmission of moveable property; and provides that personal bonds for payment or performance, bonds of caution, bonds of guarantee, bands of relief, bonds and assignations in security of every kind-which would seem to embrace bonds bearing interest, decreets of any Court, policies of Assurance of any assurance company or association in all along done in the numerous and important changes which have taken place within the last twenty or thirty years; but whether they do or not, it appears to us that until this mercantile idea has been realised, law reform on transfers of property of all kinds will not have reached its end. Lord Belhaven's Church Bill carries us into a dif ferent region-and if this were the place to speak of them-into church politics. In both Assemblies it was made the occasion of opening up the old controversy of '33, '43; and both spoke of each other's principles in such terms as showed that the old spirit still smouldered, and was not extinct. The Bill seems to wear a very innocent appearance, and chiefly to concern the church, and its ministers and members. It may indeed involve important principles, and these may fairly enough be made the subject of observation in Assemblies or elsewhere, but if those whom it |