The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-12-14

xH'nSHss on We necessary 81 chdnge n
the iasps relating to the Conrs of.dh-
feafs. s
In examining the organization of the court
of Appeals, the first and most striking OBJ
Election, arises from the fewness of the jud-
gcs. This defect will be found on Inquiry
to have most extensive influence, i'm almost
every aspect, in which the subject can be
viewed. a.
Thereare so few judges in the court. that Il
may often happen. that two of them, NAV
be disabled by indispostion, from attending.
This would OF course prevent the Court FROM
sitting. 1t may also. often happen that two
OF the judges from relationship, or connection
with one of the parties. or from having an
interest in a;case, Involving a similar sues-
ton with that before the court, will refuse
tn sit: this would necessarily prevent the
court from deciding the cause
thus variet. of circumstances will often
intervene, which will either prevent the
court from holding its sessions, or impede
its decision of particular cases. That a FREE
quent liability to such a state of things, is a
serious objection to the present arrange
| ment, must be obvious to all. But il the
court was not exposed to great Inconvenience,
from the causes which have been stated.
there are other evils of no less magnitude.
| arising from the smalness of its numbers.
Il ought to be recollectcd that the court of
Appeals. is court of the highest appellate
IJurlsdiction, and in the last resort. 1t is of
the greatest importance, that the decisions
! of such court, should not only be distin
guished by wisdom, but that n conviction
that they possess that character, should
be impressed on the minds of the people in
| general. The prevalence of such belief.
would make their decisions respected, it
would tend to quiet titles, prevent litigation
| and insure the repose and tranquility of So
ciety. Inferior courts as well as individuals
would receive with veneration, and obey
without repining, sentences which they be-
| ieved TO be oracles of truth and wisdom
These are the great benefits which arise
from an appellate court of final jurisdiction,
and every thing which tends to diminish
these advantages impairs the utility of the
court ITSELF The court of Appeals as now
established. is liable to great objection. in
this view of the subject. An appeal may be
entered from a Chancery court, fixing a
principle, which has been successfully sane
1 toned by each of the Chancellors the court
OF Appeals, If full, may be two for reversing,
and one for affirming The decree. In such a
case the principle of the decree, will have
been approved by three chancellors, and one
Jndge OF the appeals, and yet will be rover
sed, and a different principle established by
the Judgment of two judges Of the court of
Appeals.
| 1t is believed that a decision under sucl,
circumstances, will be received with such
yeneraton by the people, as ought to be paid
to the DEGREES of the supreme appellate
court, or carry with it such evidence of rec
titude. AS to induce belief that it is a just
exposition of the law
But this objection is susceptible of A still,
stronger illustration. principle may be
recognized by every judge of the General
court, either at conference at the General
court, or on a case adjourned to that court
under the act of Assembly, or ir NAV be de-
cided by each judge successfully in his Cir
cunt, & finally upon an appeal to the court of
| Appeals, it may be reversed by the decision
OF two Judges against one. ThHs two Judges
may decide contrary to the opinion of fourteen
others 1t may even happen that the Opt
mons OF the three Chanceiors. NAV coincide
with those of the General court. since the
| Chancery courts have right to send cues
tons OF iawIwhich may arise in their cour. 70
be decided on by the General Court; in such
Cases 1t may happen that two judges OF the
court OF Appeals may over rnle the known
| opinions of all the judges of the General
| Court, OF the three Chancelors, and one of
| the Judges OF the Appeals. In such conflicts
OF OPINION. the public mind, would not rest
satished with the rule, which should be laid
N'."" III l!iC dpi1tiidte Court. In England
whose judges and lawyers are dintinguished
ey profound legal erudition, and whose iu-
dlciai poiity has been matured by the expe-
| rience OF ages, the Court of Kings Bench
winch has an extensive appellate lurisdic
tion' consists of four judges; questions of
great magnitude, or intrcacy, are freuuent-
" adjourned to the Court of E.xcheouer
Shamber,'whiCh consists of the Judges of the
rings Bench and Common Pleas and ,b.
barons OF the Exchequer, and in the last re.
sort an appeal les to the House of Lords
winch can command the aid of all the iudici-
al ability of the kingdom The Sonseouence
IS, that questions of law settled with so mech
soieinnty, and confirmed by the Concurrent
sentiment OF so many of the ablest LAWYERS
In 'he Kingdom become binding prcedents,
whpse authority are neither questioned by
thc people nor the courts. It's therefore con-
ce'ved, to be fatal defect, in the present
arrangement OF the court of Appeals. thar
although the judges are confessedIy able &c
enlightened, their decisions will not ALWAYS
carry with them that dignity and weight,
which wodid attend them, if they proceeded
from more numerous body. The observa-
ions which have already been made. pro.
ceed on the idea, that all three Judges of the
appeals will be present. But it will often
happen, but two can attend, and if all are
present, tnat some G,ay decline to sit. from
relationship, interest, or other causes. When
TWO Constitute the court, they may he often
divided IN sentiment, and then the opin,on
OF one Judge, will fix the principle on wfScb
the cause IL tn bo cet,leI