The Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1822-1829, 1826-01-19

hFafinE nj inf pfHl'oo ny nv 'fHts"i ~
s~mbly.l
NJ blackburn spoke il opp sition f.
bnth Substitutes, and ~ farar at the origin
II bill brought IN by HIM. VI. Upsha'-
s8t>lltufr proposes 10 CIV jurisdiction IL
he Superior Canris al thaucery in the
DISTRICT where ihe parile. r'sidr. Ia pro-
nuuncp Divorces s'lher Cineatd matri-
n0Hii ora mensd et Moro-ih. pirdding- IL
br conducted IN the usual way 81 bill and
alssri-ihe age and sex of the children,
and the Estate of the partlss Ia be- ascer-
TAI ed--tbe Children 10 bs assigned To IL
ihr. father ~ mother, Al the discretion 81
he Court Al appeal IL he allowed either
! parry 81 The General Assembly, upon 81
,ug bond aud seemiiy for cosl,--lhr re-
! cord Ia be the ouls evidence used before
| Tie Graer.l A-sembIy-.and anlho lLlpg
The inpanneli ol a Jury, f"r thr asc,r
| talumrnt Of fact, At the desire ui the Court,
OF of either party.l
Mr.. Briggs supported the substitute,
! though ~ was opposrd To transferring tn
jurisdiction over divorces from tn G,ne-
RI Assembly.
Nr. Winston. likewise supported Mr..
faylni's substitute, ~ not in Ect transfer
rug thr powers of granting Divorces tom
thu Legislature.
Mr. Upshur defended his Substitute,
and ,epllrd To Me.Ts. Bugs and VIM.
sion.
Mr. Taylor replied to Mr.. Upshur al
length.
Mr. Bryce next addressed The Chair, op-
posing al the different projects aud oitrlag
a lhrd Substitute.
NJ. G. Olson succeeded, detailing his
WINS of tins subject, which we're IN favor
OF dlve.ting the Legislature entirely of ja-
llsdlcion, aud ol reposla9 II IN The Courts
1T Chancery, with tnr rlghl ri appeal 10 the
Court OF Appe 'Is-and IN opposition 10
M. fayl rs Substitute.
Mr.. Wood expressed himself unf,snra-
Tribunal.
Mr.. Jackson opposed NJ. Taylor, Sub
nntnte On the gronnd It'd there was NJ -
ce,sus tor the evidence of both parlr r..
qnrcd by lt-boIh hrrna genrlally viii <
IN be- divorced, and urged at SOM. lrnglh,
The prop leiy "t taking ths power hom The
Legislature.
Alr. Up,uur rrpIlrd To the gentlemen
Who had preceded MN.
Nr. Fayor replied Ia Mr.. Upshur aud
others after wnIch the CpnnltI q ad-
doptrd Mr. rs Substitute ayes 100, noes
~.
,sDe...-
.1busts under Toblcco Inspections
MAY, nom t4e committee appointed To IN
vestigair abuses undrr thr Inspection laws,
4. r.
Mr. Crump nt Cumberland, made a Re-
port ~ "Wednesday, the substance ofwhcli
follows:
The Committee report, that in this city,
the losprCtlon Is attended With great waste
and Loss, though they hay" not been able
10 ascertain The amount of the loss but
they report the fact, that one indn ldnai Ia
purchased within III Last eighteen mOnths
EIGHfi THOUSAND POUNDS Of
l"osr lobaecn, al IA prlce fixed by III In
@pectots. fThls amount, about seventy
hog,head', IL of course subtracted trnm
I y pocket of the planter.J They report
further, lnat the same individual mad pur
chased III one year % O00 lbs. If tobacco AT
Snnckor warrhouse alone Inc causes
a-slgurd luf Tins " enormous loss,o are--I.
Drafts taken from the hhds. Ia distribute
among busers-2. Finn fings cul OH hl
the IN, pector ordtnagc llom green hhds.
&c.-3. smokers aud ohrnets Supplying
themsrlyes--and 1. Probable drpIeda-
ton
To remedy this evil, the committee re-
commended, that the jd inspector he re
qulrrd t. attend the breaking Of tobacco,
baitnr n. "A
e-openin that the tobacco should hr
weighed before stripping, tud The nspcc-
tors made liable for all loss over 10 lbs.
winch amount the committee think .uili-
Gent Tor samples, Ne.
The committee further report, that large
quantities of tobacco. loose and ia tabs, are
sold by watermrn, black and white, suppu-
,ed Ia br stolen. aud got through the locks
by forged permits, mauiltsls, sc. Fhry
recommend that such sale, hr prohibited,
except under suprrinlendence of the M
spectors.
The committee further report, that the
dealing in tobacco by inspectors, hr enfo. g
ed anew, by more efficient prov sion than
the one existing.
They do not concur in the opninn
strongly expressed by lntelgent merchants
helSrr them, thai tn" whole inspection
system should ha abolished. They recon
mend however, the repeal of the prohlbi-
ton To export refused iobncro-- srrlng no
reason for that prohibition and stating
that it operated To tn" loss Of the pantr,
only while the merchant who purchases
carries the tobacco 10 some more lrnlrnt
Inspection, where II was generally passed.
They propose that a brand denoIlug rrlu
sal b. put on the hid. and that thus mak
ed, il be allowed to he exported.
The comeittee recommend the rernact-
men of the law authorisinS county coprts
10 require own,rs of Warehouses to keep
them IN repalr-and 10 invest in the Exc