Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1826-02-07

! excellent example set by the late Judge Caring
ton, who experimenting the approach OF old age. and
fearing that he nigh, become incapable OF performing
the duties ola Judge OF the Court Of Appeals, re-
signed his Office, in letter expressive of his sense
on this subject. Judge Car,ngton's letter OF re-
sIgnalion pretiXcd TO volume of the Reports
OF the Court Of Appeals. 1t is proud monu-
raent TO his memory and splendid testimony OF
his devotion TO the republican principles OF our In
stitu,ions. To Chancellor Brown he would say,
l'' go thou and 10 lilSewse.''
! No. DouthGt remarked that the question was,
had the House the power to grant the relief! And
II they had, was it expedient 10 grant 1t. He did
not think that there any force in the CONSTITUTE
onal objection OF Air. Dromgoole. 1t had been tie
Practice OF the Legislature, without any ones
s!derng it unconstitutional TO divide the chancery
districts whenever the public convenience inter-
est required it. The bill went only TO new-mo-
Gel the districts. In two OF them II proposed the
. appointment of chancellor, who was 10 be
the successor OF chancellor Brown in the Stanton
| District. Such an arrangement, was called Tor by
the interests oil the people throughout that section
ot country. And lie apr called TO the members
. from other portions of the state TO say, II under
similar circumstances, they would not CONSIDER
, that they had right to relief? lie spoke OF the
| emoarrassments OF the people from the want OF
chancery court whilst the courts OF law were open
among them. The expense he considered bore no
proportion TO the grievances sough, TO be redressed
He admitted that the conduct of Judge Caring
ton was highly praise worthy. But his case was
not similar to the present. He in afiuent
circumstances; he stood in need of charity, and
could well afford TO give mp his Office, without sa-
crlhcinS either himself Or his family. But Judge
brown could not follow the example without max
Ing sacrifice too great TO be expected of HIM He
hoped the bill would pass Other districts might
be similarly situated. before the
House, in which Judge of law, who was a war
worn veteran of the revolution, was from act of
Hod, incapable of attending 10 the duties of his
ohce; yet having spent the prime Of his life in the
service oil his country, was too poor 10 live with
out his salary, OF some assistance from that coun-
Try he had so faithfully and benehciay served,
lie alluded TO Judge White. In fact, he thought
the question one, which might possibly inter-
est every district in The state.
ir. May, in reply to the objection that a sue
cessOr tor the Stanton District was be appointed
ny law, remarked, that it true the constitution
required such appointments to be made BY Joint
oaiiot; but by the bill the new chancellor TO be
appointed IN that mode. II provided that he should
perform part of the duties now performed by
chancellor Brown; and after the happening of a
Particular event, he should perform the residue OF
us duties. Where was the difference between this
case. and wha: had been done in relation 10 the
Court OF ApPeals' 1t was i .ermned that the
number OF Judges of that court should be reduced
Aoh hVe TO three, and the Law provided that when
any one OF The Judges should either die or resign
Inc other tour should so to perform the Duties and
go on, until the number was reduced 10 tnTee Did
any one ever hear that this act of the legislature
was thought unconstitutional? If it were deter
h'ihe 10 dispense with the Judge oil The district or
lhe eastern Shore because 1t should be thought his
"u'y bore no proportion to his salary. and as he
cannot be removed uIder the constitution, and
: a law should be passed declaring. that after his
death or resignation, The duties OF his Office should
De peroTinedby the Judge OF the district on this side
oil the Bay, would any constitutional objection be
urged TO such measure? Jndge Brown was chan
ceior In . chancery districts, embracing SO coun-
ues' and white population OF 40 600. This
great number OF our citizens was at present
!, deprived OF all the benefits of chancery jurs.
dlctIon, embracing a multitude ofinteres,s (which
Mr. NJ. enumerated,) and they asked relief from
the justice OF the House. Were they not entitled
to1l! Should they remain subject 10 such heavy
inconvenencies. merely account of the inability
OF aJudse! Suppose it were necessary to impeach
mat Judge, would it be pretended that during
the tedious process of that impeachment the iuso
tice oil the country should be damned up. Sup
pose the present had occurred in the Rich
t inond Disrct, where the commonwealth is a sutton
TO the amount OF about 500, 900, to say nothing
OF the multitude of private suitors won!d it be
uslhaoie to tie up, If not sacrifice, This great pub
lie ana private interest merely for the want of an
! hudi''ohal chancellor! What would be proper to
do here, the principles of eternal Justice REQUIRES
should be done in the western country
~. GhOiSon objected 10 no other part of the
BILL but the clause making the new chancellor the
successor OF chancellor Brown, in the Stanton
district. he did not wish 10 be thought illiberaI
+ In has views, and he regretted that he could no,
support the bill, IN consequence Of principles which
ne heid paramount to any disposition to accommo-
cate portion OF the people. He argued that the
Dill was opposed to fundamental principles
and to the spirit OF the constitution II had been
said that great reefwould be granted by passing it
but pass 1t, and the crisis will be oyer-a judicial
penson-lis will be established The case of Judge
White would be Immediately embraced in the same
principle. lie asked, if had ever been contem-
plated that we should have parcel of infirm Judg-
es receiving pensions, and performing no dutyo If
he constitution contained principles let US adhere
to them. He contended that the subdivision of the
district, had been made more in reference to the
convenience OF the judge, than that of the people
There was no constitutional objection TO the divi--
SION OF districts. But the bill not only provided
tor the appointment of an additional Judge, but
, required him to perform the duty of chancellor
Brown, and after his death or resignation, made
him his successor. Theidea of successor, neces-
sarily presupposed vacancy. But whoever heard
OF the appointment OF Judge by lar? Suppose
the new Judge should die before the old one, how
ridiculous would be this provision of the law ?
Suppose the new Judge should at the death of
chancellor Brown, be disagreeable 10 the Iegisla-
ture, or should have proven himself incapable,
where would be the remedy? Would not the hands
oil future Legislature be tied up by this provision
IN the bill a. individuals, the House might be
Informed Of the disability of the chancellor but did
they know 1t officially, and without this knowledge
was !! proper for them to legisate on the subject
The Judges poverty had been referred to a. an in