"The glorious uncertainty of the law was a thing well known and complained of, by all ignorant people, but all learned gentleman considered it as its greatest excellency"

Richard Brinsley Sheridan draws attention to a paradox within the legal system: the contrast between how the uncertainty of law is perceived by the general public and by those who are trained within the system. To the common, uninitiated person, the unpredictable or ambiguous outcomes, decisions that can swing one way or the other, cause great frustration. They see this uncertainty as a flaw. The public desires clear answers, straightforward verdicts, and a system that operates in absolutes. The law, in their mind, should protect by offering certainty.

For "learned gentlemen", or trained legal professionals and scholars, the so-called uncertainty in the law is not just a necessary evil, but its crowning strength. Their reverence stems from recognizing that society and human behavior are infinitely complex, and this complexity resists simple codification. If law was too rigid or mechanical, it could not adapt to the unique circumstances of each new case, nor keep pace with changing values and situations. Legal uncertainty provides room for interpretation, argument, and evolution. It allows judges to weigh facts, contexts, and the spirit behind the statutes, ensuring justice is tailored, rather than imposed formulaically. The law’s ambiguity fosters ongoing debate and development, which is critical to its longevity and relevance.

Sheridan’s observation cleverly separates lay perceptions from expert appreciation. Ignorance, used here not disparagingly but to indicate lack of specialized knowledge, cannot see the virtue in ambiguity because uncertainty tends to undermine trust when viewed from the outside. Conversely, for those who understand the machinery of law, flexibility is essential to equity and progress. The uncertainty is not an inconvenience, but rather an opportunity for sophisticated reasoning, for advocacy, and for the gradual refinement of justice across generations. Sheridan ultimately suggests that the very aspects of the law that frustrate the average person are precisely what allow it to serve society best.