The Wheeling repository — Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.], 1808-03-03 00:00:00, page 4

exercise of this power, together with the
king's non obstante, and suspending and
dispensing powers, among other things,
brought Charles the First to the block,
and was one of the causes of the final
expulsion of the Stewart family. The
ennd and inhuman use of tln.se powers
tender the celebrated Jeffries, must be
known to every gentleman in this com
mittee.
On tendering the crown to William
the Third and Marv the Second, the
lords and commons fl amed the bill of
rights, which the king sanctioned. It
-repealed the susj ending and dispensing
powers : it abolished the court of high
commission : it prohibited the raising
money irom the people without consent
parliament: the maintaining of stand
ing armies in time of peace ; inflicting
cruel and unusual punishment , and de
manding excessive bail. It provided
for the liberty ol the ’press and of speech;
and it, moreover, secured the due im
pannelling of jurors, and declared that
in eases oi hiah treason these should be
freeholders.
Finding bv fatal experience, that laws
were insufficient for the happiness of the
people, unless faith!uliy dispensed bv
the judges ; and that judges appointed
by the king, re moveable at his pleasure,
and paid with his own bounty out ci his
civil list revenues, had in all arbitrary
reigns been the mere instruments of the
king’s vengeance ; the parliament in
1692 passed a hill for “■ securing the
freedom td trial, the unbiassed admini
stration of justice, and the liberty of the
subject, by depriving the sovereign of
th power to , ,
qjjleiul mhbehaehonr” This bill, as it
ought, received the proto * of d: infa
mous Jt dries ; and w..s negatived by the
king. i he parliament made several o
ther fruitless attempts to rescue their
courts from the king’s domination, but
were unsuccessful until th thine, nth
year of his reign, when tlr y be tow ci
the succi ssion ol the crown -m the ; i i;i
cess Sophia o! il mover, at the king’s
desire ; in consideration cl which, h •
grunted that the iud^os sho il 1 i. Id tin ii
commissions dining good behaviour,
b it might he removed at the dc ire of
both houses. The judges were still de
pendent on every suect , t ty the crown
until tlu first of George th. Third,who
recommended it to the parliament to
secure them against the ki ,’s demise,
iorv.ui 1; lie r. ceivtd the unanimous
thankg ol the-lords, commons, Jk people.
i
While the people elected the sheriffs,
it was a considerable security to the
subject, that it the king sought his ruin
unjustly, the people were for that very
reason his triends ; and their officer se
ll cted a jury for ins trial. The corrupt
slave of a despot might preside at his
ti ial, but an impartial jury had the pow
er oi passing between him and his king,
i'his security was effectually removed,
In- abolishing popular elections, and pla
cing the sheritl’s office under the patron
e ;'e ot the judges and great officers of
the kingdom. Hut when the judges were
rendered independent, the sheriff’s of
fice followed the same fate : the judges
constituted a majority ot the council of
appointment, and being themselves in
dependent of the crown, the crown could
no longer influence the sheriffs. Thus,
by accident, anil a iortunato course of
events, that very instrument which des
potisni had contrived lor the subject’s
destruction, became a shield ior las pro
t ction : and the world saw, tor the first
tune, a judiciary, in all respects inde
pendent ot corrupt influence, under
whose authority the innocent object of
kinglv or popular tury,could, with equal
security, laugh to scorn a monarch and
\\ hen the judiciary became emaneL
pated from slavery, the bill of rights be
gan to operate, and a sense of justice
returned to the nation. Xhe parliament
began to try the victims oi its former
corruption and malice. It proceeded to
reverse attainders which had disgraced
the lute reigns, and to restore to their
descendants, the fortunes, and as far as
tii* y could, the honours, ol honest men
long since in their graves. They for
feited the estate of Jcftries, and from
that period to the present dav, they have
i been examining tbe guilt or innocence
| of patriots condemned and executed
■ without trial. Among others, they
; “avc since acquitted Johnston, Lord
Uv.ssel, Algernon Sidney, and Alder
in.m Cornish: and, as far as m\ memo
ry serves me, no attainder has taken
' bice, which it has afterwards been
j 1 ,mid necessary to rev erse, from the
year 1 701 to the present time.
1 will now, Mr. Chairman, examine
the judicial syste m of this co mon
wealtli, and compare its independence
" llh that oi the judiciary of Great-firi
taiu.
iiy the 5th artii le of our bill of rights,
be pco{ ie of this siat h ive declared,
uiat the “ lcgislaiivt, executive, and ju
dietary powers, ought to be separate and
distinct ; and that the members of the
two first be restrained from oppres
sion, ’ they proceed to declare, that at
stated periods they ought to return to
the body of the people. And the 13th
section of our constitution provides,that
the judges, secretary, attorney-general,
and all the clerks of courts, s:hall hold
their offices during good behaviour; and -
that the judges and attorney-general
•'•1/ l11 adequate and fixed salaries,
hence it may seem, that the judges of
iigmia are more independent that the
judges ol Great-Britain ; but I will pre
sently shew that they are hut equally so.
i hey are equally liable to impeachment,
and for the same offences: but they can
not be removed at the desire of the le
I gislutui e, which I consider as being a
nominal responsibility in Great-Britain,
! !)Ut w ould be a fatal one in this country!
_ How have we secured the sherifFs ?
Nearly as they are secured in England*:
hut we have made them yet more inde
pendent. Our county courts are ever
living aristocratic bodies, with the un
usual power oi supplying their own va~ .
cancies. They are to nominate, to the
executive, at least two persons, as the
English judges nominate three, and iu
like manner the executive are bound to
cc: antis s ion one. But this nomination,
in.Virginia, is confined ;o the body no
minating. Thus, it appears that the il
| lustiious framers ol our state constitu
! tion, have adopted, for the people of this
state, and us lar as the different frame •
ol governnv at w» uld permit, copied a
complete and effectual system of judi
cial independence, the effects of which
had been tried for seventy-five years by
their ancestors, and which was found to
bring home to all men a full security for
prop rty and personal liberty.
But did they stop here ? Tiey did not.
Like the people of England, they had
provided lor the “freedom of trials, the
impartial administration of justice, and
till, liberty ol the” citizen, by depriving
the legislative and executive depart
ments ol tlie owt r to remove the judges,
“except for offi. lal misbehaviour.” But
they ad pted the same means for secu
ring th people from vexatious prosccu
turns. Tre) secured, for this purpose*
a \ inT ’ indent tenure of the office of
attorm » general, that he might be also ,
rein-., d from legislative and executive a
influence. 1 ney did the same for iho •
clerks of courts, who arc entrusted w ith
those records widen are the perpetustt..