Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-03-27

custody OF capt. Perkins of the Federal
army, and six or seven other persons, as
guard, passed through that county on Sum
day last; that they reached Journeys ia
xern, near Hampden Sidney college, i'm
Prince Edward that night, and proceeded
on the next morning, by the way of Cum
5erland Courthouse, Gainesville, sc. for
the City ofWashington, where 1t is proba-
BILE they arrived on Wednesday evening or
early yesterday morning.
DISTRIBUTIONS ON TRE .fCTS OF
THE LAST GENE R.fL .dSSElfBI, Y
or PIRG ENI4-coNTINUED
The acts we have yet to- notice on the
subject of the administration of Justice are
not less important than those already cxa-
mined.
An act to amend the act entitled can act
TO compel the attendance of witnesses be-
fore single Justice of the peace" which
Will take effect on the first dav of June
next, increases the fine OH witness failing
to attend before any magistrate of county
or corporation, to give evidence in anv maj
ter depending Lcfore him, and not having
reasonable excuse for such failure, to n
sum not exceeding five dollars, at the dis
erection OF such magistrate, besides being
liable to damages as heretofore. This pro,
vision became necessary, in consequence
OF the extension of the Jurisdiction OF a sin
gle Justice of the peace, and will probably
be adequate to the object for which it was
intended.
An act directing the mode of proceed
ing against decedents' estates, and provid-
ing a mode of reviying suits in certain cases,,
has supplied the deficiencies ofthe law re-
biting TO the case where, on default of the
quallhcation OF an executor or administra-
TOR, the estate OF person decca sed, is COM
united 70 the sheriff. 1t authorises any Gro
oitor OF the decedent to prosecute ae inst the
sheriff any action at law, or suit in eouitv.
which might have been maintained apainst
the executor or administrator, if one had
qualified and, i'll case of the sheriff7s death
before nc has fully administered, REQUIRES
the succeeding sheriff to take into his hands
the estate unadministered, and to act i'm ;,lI
respects, as II 1t had been originally commit
ted to him; all suits relative to the said es-
tate, commenced by or against his Drede-
cessor, being to be revived bv scire facias
IN his name. 1t farther provides for the re-
vlvdl OF suits at law, or in eouitv, of an
pea!s, Wrlts OF error or supersedeas, which
abate by the death of any party, whose es-
tate Is committed to the sheriff as before
mentioned; ami directs that in all cases
such sheriff shall not be liable for costs be-
You'd the assets in his hands.
An act " TO amend the several acts emno,y.
ering securities to recover damages in a surnma-
ny way, very properly cornpeIs every couy, zen
oe'inS judgment IN favor OF security against
ms principal, to allow interest on the sum Maid
He'etofore the law authorised only the sum maid
to be recovered, by motion in summary vyav
although IN an action on the case on bshaIT Of
me security, the jury might have allowed ;nrere,t
upon it in the form Of damages.
An act " declaring the law IN cases of dis.
counts AMI Offsets" has exactly copied the sixth
section of the act of I748 ch u. rsee V;,o;r;. |
Laws, Ed OF 1863, p go VIZ. Sha, :. ~"
+" any suit shall be commenced and nyosec,,sJ
q" Tor any debt due by iu1gnent, bond hill or
" otherwise, the defendant shall have l;h,r,y
upon trial thereof, to make all the discount h.
" can against such debt, and upon proof th.r.
:. OIL the same shall be allowed in court" A
snort preamble states that doubts lad arisen ,,he
fber there was any law in force regnIatino de
counts and offsets, for. more pronerIv
oYrsJ IN the courts of common law wi,bi1 ,h;s !
commonwealth and This act was passed for re-. |
moving those doubts. II is much 10 he reo,e,,ed |
that, IN attempting to remove those douhfs tbo !
legislature have used the vague and Inaccurate !
Iangs1ge of the old act of I74s, which NAV ner
saps give rise to more disputes on the suhiect Of
discounts, than have hitherto existed in m. 80,
Of this state Il appsars indeed ,bat IN. $50
secuon OF that act has been considered Inv ahIe
ridges as being SKILL in force Tsee Tucker,s
III 'ckstone, vol p. 305 and several decis;ors
have taken place in 'he Court of Apoe,re ,vh;rL
&c n to have been founded on a suppo,i,ion ,b.t
SUN was the case; particularly those of MICAH
VS. I5rner, Call, 1876, and Browns adm,
VS. Garland, Wash. 22I but as thar ,ec,iou
was rot inserted in the Revised Code the coz,
nectn~ss OF those decisions might be cons;drrsd
a. 'nlp'fu and legislative settlement of ,Le
sue Toss might therefore have been necssss,y
But q attempting this, it would surely bavebscr
soV''aole 70 nave passed q II W and better wo,J.
90 law In pretere nc 10 re cnactinr thar Of 1zaa
on tne language whereof several ir7Dos,aut o,,cs
tOll' resent themselves, which cannot he eas;l,
ans |e'ed with Certainty un;il the courts sb,H
nave seNied them, and which Of eourss i, H..
mean ,ins may occasion considerable li,;,,t;on
IN the hrst place, as Hofee Of The set off or de,
intended 20 be offered at tie trial is no,,e
CURED, but the defendantSis to have rberts 80
make an roe discount be can il would ,ee,,, -,
nc rn'Sni otter evidence thereof witbout nrog;,,,
: previous nouce 10 the plaintiff. and ne ,c,,,
wouu DC bound TO admin such evidence 10 yo %
.hS jury Wuh respect m the reou,yiny Mi.
:, DC gwen OF an intended set-oT, the r,,c,;S.
mas been various in Giferent co,rts. 49,, .--
Ssueo u - believed, by any decision of ,hs
SoSrt OF Appeals though reason /, ce,,,iuie
-. ,lI lNvor OF rendering notice nccess,rv 4
PIov'sioh concerning il ought theysfo,s ~, 49,,
PuIpo'e OF preventing disputes, to ba,s ~ we
sened in the law. ~ nave oeen IN
gan IN declaring thar discounts r,ay Ia ,.. ,
ven AZ the trial of agy ..., a. -, y Se pro-