Anfwer XXI. Grace and favour may be applied with great propriety to a judgment rendered in the Common Pleas of Montreal. La Breche verfus Billaire, the judgment ftates, "Le tout confideré fans avoir égard aux temoins du "demandeur, la cour renvoie le dit demandeur de fon "action avec depens * APPENDIX, No. XVI. Being Extracts from the Evidence given be·fore the Commiffioner for the Investigation into the paft Adminiftration of Justice in the Province of Quebec. Extract from the Evidence of William Goodall, Efq. Partner in the House of Brook Watfon and Co. of London, Merchants. Anfier VIII. I have upwards of eight hundred debtors in this province; but from the uncertainty of * Tranflation.-The Court having confidered the whole, without paying any attention to the witneffes of the plaintiff, difmiffes the faid plaintiff from his action, with cofts. the laws, and the great expence created by delays in the Courts, I am afraid to take legal methods to recover the debts which are due to me. Extract from the Evidence of John Young, Merchant of Quebec. Anfwer IX. I never attended the Court of Common Pleas, either from curiofity, or on my own business, having never had a law fuit, except as the attorney or agent of others; but during the times I have been obliged to attend, I have not heard, on any occafion, the Court or any of the Judges declare, that the bankrupt laws of France, or the Code Marchand of Louis XIV. made in 1673, or the Ordinance of 1702, were the laws of this province, until about fourteen or twenty days ago, I received in charge as a juryman from the Bench, that where they were not altered by the ordinances of the Legislative Council, they were in full force. Extract from the Evidence of George Allsopp, Efq. late of the Legislative Council, and Judge in the Court of Appeals. Anfwer I. Respecting the causes wherein my own name or the names of perfons I acted for, do do appear fince the year 1776, in the confultations I have held with my advocates, Mr. Monk and Mr. Panet, at Quebec, they have always given me very doubtful opinions of fuccefs, not with regard to the juftice of the caufes I was con cerned in, but with respect to what the decifion of the Judges might chance to be, from the uncertainty of the laws in general, from not knowing whe ther the Judges would apply any, or what particular law to the cafe, or according to their wills give equitable decifions, upon the maxim laid down of doing, what the faid Judges termed, fubftantial justice. And this I have underflood of the Court of Appeals, as well as the Court of Common Pleas at Quebec. Anfwer III. For the above, and other motives and reafons affigned in my answer to the first interrogatory, but especially from the oppofition thofe Judges made to every falutary propofition offered by me to the faid Council, in the feffions of 1779, 1780, 1781 and 1782, for a reform in the courts of law, for granting the King's fubjects the laws of England in matters of commerce and perfonal wrongs, with the trial by a jury, and the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus for perfonal fecurity as aforefaid, I confidered the faid Fudges as inimical to me and to my affairs, and have therefore dreaded, and been deterred, for many years paft, from bringing fuits into the Courts of ComL 2 mon mon Pleas in this province; nor have I done fo unless unavoidable. Extract from the Evidence of Andrew Cameron, Merchant of Quebec. Answer II. I certainly have confidered myself. injured by the uncertainty of the laws and írregularity of proceedings. My fuits of law have been in the Court of Common Pleas, for the diftrict of Quebec. In 1786, I had a fuit to defend with Mr. George Irwine in the faid Court, and defired leave of the Court to offer proof, and have my evidence fworn to fupport my defence; but Mr. Judge Mabane not only refused to hear my evidence, but to hear any arguments from my atterney, Mr. Robert Ruffel, to fupport my cause. At a future day judgment was given against me by the faid Court, without hearing my faid attorney, or admitting my evidence. I afterwards appealed the caufe; but upon confulting my counfel, was obliged to drop my appeal for want of that evidence being admitted in the faid Court of Common Pleas Extran Extract from the Evidence of Mr. Alexander Anfwer I. In November 1784, when the petition alluded to was figned, I was not in the province, therefore cannot fay by whom or how many it was figned; but I have reafon to believe, by a very confiderable refpectable number of of English and French, as well in the town as in the country. Had I been in the province, I should have figned it, as I think it contains nothing that was not then, and now is, ftrictly true. Anfwer II. The uncertainty of the laws having infufed in the generality of minds a want of confidence in the decifions of the Courts, I have avoided, as much as in my power, bringing caufes before them; those I did were generally fuch as could not admit of uncertainy. In the action, myself against Loubet, my advocate, Mr. Powell, was in the utmost uncertainty refpecting the event; but coinciding with me, that we had fome chance from the uncertainty of the Court, I ordered him to proceed, and we prevailed. In the oppofition made by Cartier to the diftribution of Bernard's effects, I experienced fuch uncertainty and delays, and my advocate, Mr. Davidfon, having declared it impoffible to fay how or when an end might be put to it; that I was obliged, with his advice to compound L 3 |