Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1826-01-10

eau vi his accusation that his guilt should
openly aud III his presence, by witnesses he should
have trial by jury and that he should deemed
guilty of crime till that gu established Inv the
unanimous verdict OF his peers This has no otler
ella i'm praise, it sumariy cunvcts aud Furnishes
without Of these obsev2uces required by bill Of
rights If it be lawful if this plain undsguised invasion
oi every provision, held guarantee OF
personal safety be supported and maintained,
constitutions waste paper, they Political toys
20 amuse au4 deceive, protect
PIC very shame, Virginia should hereafter bab
bic about State rights aud enceachmcnts the charter
he mon while she permits her constitution to be in
vaded by devices gross and clumsy these
The general welfare" "pubc Improvement "encour-
ageent OF domestic manufacturers furnish petexts
perl"us Than the in'm"ray of sendi"g challenge,
mask connivauces evade constitutional restrictions
IL posshie however, that so'ne of those who coscien
tiously believe he constitutional and wise
",t therefore "disp""s"ble b." also satisfied Mr.
Us aoSoVedoy law, OF the crime and punishment, should
not be brought within its qualifying operation, may VET
scrurc how tcfeoncle these opinions and permit his
qualifications This scruple only from the terms
Oh the OATH adopted from the original law, anal relating
back 10 its hiSt enactment The Modification the oath
proposed by Mr. Doutat, will obviate that obecIon and
II remains only she that this modification is arran,ed
oy the cieare principles and most aPpose judicial expo
Sion Had the Legislature introduced the ITSELF into
inc act OF 1917 the difficulty could have fec
"eh II would nave related only To the time of its
men Adopting the oath by reference it, substantial
y the same, As If it had been introduced into the
ing statute, and the like construction should prevail But
the difficulty is wholly maginary.
1t is undoubtedly true, the province Of those
VINO are to amniStel the law, is expourd change
on amer H. mat belongs only to the Legislaue Butin
administering IT. the intention is to he preserved; that
ten'ioni IS, indeed. primarily be sought only the wo
h" IT has sometimes happened, that words have been
ed' without which, the intention of the Legislature
be attained; is the province If administer the
law To supply them. 1t has also happened, that words
which have been used, if literally psed would lead s
TO results nauesy unjust aud illegal therefore never
ascrbahe to the Legislature daily Of those who
administer the law, to nOd the words result;
and ii nccdiui, reject Htnn.
Nods used in the law, were added and Stumbled NV
the judiciary, in ,hc o!!oin among Call
453 Wallace and Taliferro; Call, $50 Brown Tu-
beyei.
The ocrotions g The Terms of an OATH prescribed bv la
SO n" to suit it to the real novelty urs-
prudence.
By an ancient statute Of Virginia, attachment
was allowed To the landlord whose tenant was about 70
remove his eiiec before tine expiration time.
distress eoniG ne made; but TO obtain it, he required
" "'"e o"h what rent his tenant TO pay, what
time IT became due, and that he bad Just reason 10 susue =
aud verify believed, that his yvouia rcrloyc his
effects out of the county and corporations before the time OF
!aymcnt Act Of 1743, Rev. Cude of 1892 pare 154
NJ the time the oath presC bel was co-nxtensve
with the aachment; for that allowed Other case
but Where the intended his effects out OF
mr. cni"'lY o. corporal. on.
by subsequent act the right attach was extended f,-
cases where the tenant about remove his fleets nor
"H OF me county or corporation, but place
"tH'in II; an oath still requisite the Legislature
emitted t" modify the term of the sinal tn, as to
adapt 1t To The extension Of Under this ne,
law the difficulty occurretl without the attcbn,ent
could not issue take the oath terms Drecrj5d b
he lar, thai the tenant was about to remove his e,f
ont ri the coVg c0rp0rTf0n when the gcund Of an
picaon was iUemdcd removal from the premises Ia sone
oh' place rtin the county corporations would have
been direct pcjury The felt scruplr in obva,ina
the difficulty To adhere to the terms Of the pre-
scribed by the law, the object They ,oli-
fed b aud instead of rcfung the party swear, thntie
eects were 10 he rrnoNed ont Ct the county form
Prcscr1btd received oath conforraby 10 the fact
The oath may be taken hy Nj D. according 10 lis real
operation 'ri Trcacc II ne hlc It reenaced and
not to ITS original adoption. such modification is ndis-
pensae to reconcile the decision of General Cor,
ina" II does not apply to arising before lis