The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-12-11
COMMUNICATION.

Not branch of the judiciary iyftem of Vir-
e'"'a he's elc:iecd' tho ei,oris OF innovation. As
IN every other cafe, fome of thefe are good, and
fume are bad.
One propofes to extend the iurfdicion of
inele magistrates to 20 dollars.
Another recommends the fyitcm Of arbitration
in place of more formal proceis.
A third propofes to limit the number of
Magistrates, and rcmunerate them according
to the qnantum of their f-rvices.
a fourth, to put down the Chancery Ditriets,
and to unite the chancery and common.law
juriidittions in the fame tribunal
On all thefe proportions for reform, men
may differ. But there is one other inno-
Walton TO he pointed out, to which no man &C
quainted with the following facts can pofiibly
object. The evils propofed to be remetiied are
10 obvious they are 70 direGt and preiIing in
their nature that there is no man who will
not admit it is impoliibe TO point ont a mode,
in which the same sun Of money & the same
time of Iegilation could be 70 eahy appropri-
ated to the removal of fuch great e,yils. The
innovation we allude to, applies to the Court of
-4beeaA.
1t is fan, that it takes nearly FIVE wears to
bring fuit TO decilion, even after it has come
before this court.
Ii is fact, hat fuits for hundreds of pounds.
which require too not more than an hour or
two of argument, are hung up for terms in
this court Of Gsidy.
1t is al fact, that man may be ruined by the
tPeedy administration of julce before the f.
de-ni court, while he ia Handing at the portals
of the State court, flung in vain for iufice.
The claims Ggai'lF him my be decided in two
years; whilA on claims of not inferior amount
or clearnets, it will require years to obtain
dccliion in his favour. The limits of Rich
mand prefcnt a memorable example of this
truth.
It is a fact that there are or 400 fuits
pending before the court of Appeals, to be
decided on arguments; and that not more than
25 or so Of theie conteited claims are decided
at each term.
1t Is a fact, that the average number of fuits
decided before them, is fcarcely if any thing, G-
perior to the average number continually pan-
ing into their docket. Not 10 add that
Should the preieut Judge Of the Richmond
Chanccry Diitriet decide rs many eanlcJ al each
iubieqnent term, as he has done during the
Taft and ihould ls many appeals be taken on
theie decions, in proportion to their number,
as was done under his predeo eilor the nupf-
Der OF tuitS before the court of appeals mua be
exceilively inCreafed, inRead Of diminilheG.
Iheie are memorable and melancholy facts.
And to what do they point that the adminif.
tration Of juticc by the court of appeals is flow,
tedious and exPentiye; that If the prefent fyE.
tenn is permitted to continue, men will either
abandon their right of appeal altogether, or
will refort it at the expeDce of having their
tults Procraitlnated for 8, 6, and an increafng
number of years; and that fome expedicnt
ought immediately to be employed, FOR facili-
ialing the progrefs of Juice through this
court.
Increafe the falary of the judges to $40 or
1000 T.. and let it be on the exprefs condition OF
their holding the court open for the greater part
of the year, aud this clog to the adj
mniitration ofjuRicc will quickly vaniGn
CRITIC.