John Scott's last years as a law officer were characterised, not by a single dramatic event such as the Regency crisis or the treason trials, but by a constant press of work. This was particularly true in matters of criminal law, which kept him busy in chambers, in court, and on the floor of the House of Commons. Political unrest, and ministerial fear of it, continued, and fuelled a range of activities for the law officers in respect of conduct possibly amounting to treason and seditious libel. A definite trend too, emerges in Scott's work during this time, which was openly to favour legislation over litigation. Stephen Watson has identified an actual shift in policy and associated it with William Pitt. Of comparable, if not greater, importance in this matter must have been the attitude and conduct of the Attorney General. His post uniquely qualified him to assess the costs and benefits of different government responses, and his professional reputation and standing in the government afforded him considerable authority. Moreover, the other ‘elements’ of a successful prosecutorial regime were lacking. The replacement of Henry Dundas with the Duke of Portland at the Home Office did not provide either vigour or guidance, and the acquittals of Hardy and Tooke demonstrated that the English bench was not bound to act in accordance with the government's wishes.