Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1828-02-27
as5GssssamsaU s5ga1gaQs


Chancellor Iaytor.-The Chancellor of this District
having some time since addressed communication 10
'he iouse Oh delegates explaining the cause of his
mission 10 take further security from the clerk of tic
chancery court in June 1926, according to of
'"e previous session, requiring the judges Of the
onReaih TO take il OF clerks generally; the letter
referred to the committee for Justice aud gave
rise 10 report from that body, which may be
another Column On Saturday last this report came
up IN due succession, aud after debate, motion
OF MR.. brodnaX 10 reConmit il with instructions
the committee to investigate the official conduct Of
Chancellor Taylor, from the t,no of his appointment,
| preparatory to an impeachment, prevailed.
| On Monday the committee commenced the iDvesi
cation, and Rcpj'p. w. Leigh, Esq. appeared before
the'n as counsel for Chancellor Taylor Tie enquiry
was directed 10 three charges L. Relating a certain
peace warrant issued by tie Chancellor . His
refusal to try the new issues according TO tho re-
QUESTION of the law s. His persistng to live a, Need
ham in Cumberland wien he was rcqnired 10y law to
live in Richmond.
/. Tie warrant. The chancellor .omc + or > wears
ago, in consequence OF being threatened with an as
saalt in private misunderstanding which thew clan
ced 10 bave. by Mr.. John Wheeler OF Prince Edward
issued Justice ofthe Peace peace warran, against
" S"" w OC ieInTncu rCi3rc the ChlnCei-
Ter OF the Richmond District The Illegally of this
act was urged, and conceded by Hlr. Leigh both as his
own opinion, AMI The present opinion Of the chancellor
himself. MT Leigh explained the misrepresentation
Gnuer which the warrant issued by The chancellor
statute of Virginia constitutes the Judges fine Court
OF Appeals of tue General Court and OF the Courts OF
Chancery Justices OF Tie Peace IN the commonwealth
and gives them the powers in this respect THROUGH
out the commonwealth that the Justices of the peace
have withiD the limits OF their respective couniisc-
Cnder this statute the chancellor conceived thai
his warrant Justice OF the Peace pervaded the
whole commonwealth and had accordingly himself
being in Cumberland issued his arraut against Nee
Ter IN Prince Edward. While Mr.. Le,gi, acknew
lodged for himself and the chancellor, that Ills con
struction of the law wrong, lie conterri d Thai il,
was the obvious construction justified by the phraseo
ogy OF the act; and he believed That no LAWYER reading
The statute only, aud not having reference 70 our III
d'cai system, would hesitate 10 put the chapcellor.
CONSTRUCTION upon it. The criminal judicial system OF
Virginia required all offences to be tined where commit
teu, and this particular statute be construed wit,
regard TO That prDcip!eand by t.at standard The
chsnceiot's construction wrong Mr.. Leigh y
plaiaed tie meaning Of tie act to be- hat the cancel-
Tors jurisdiction as Justices Of the Peace was pejs5nn
following them throughout The commonwealth but
extending no fasliGr than the power 10 act as mere
conseITators of the peaccand emitting their war
rants to out of the county in which fiey ere for
lie time being. MIR. Leigh stated that an nciten, III
the court of chancery, had directed his professional at
enlion TO this statute, one Which The business of The
country has not rendered necessary for tie Bar TO
investigate frequently ihat lie had in erprcted it rs
\ aOOye--auI that the riaur ell
related The circumstances of his is.uinc warrar,
against Wheeler, acknowledged upon further invest;
CATION that bis construction was wrong, and Mr.
Lejs!,'s rght.
This was the most material charge-and II beog
'uFther objected by member Of the committee u,ai
the chancellor had acted Illegally issuing the warrant
without an affidavit from any party, MIR. Leigh con.
tended that 10 that respect, the conduct of tie chan
ceior was legal which he protested his readiness TO
establish By authority. 1t is but Justice TO the Chan
celor 10 say, that the exposition Of his counsel was in
great degree satisfactory the numerous bysander
and ii we may judge from tie event. as much so to The
House OF Delegates.
2 In relation 10 the issues: Gir. Leigh said las
we'll as we could understand him through the crowd
or il was said by DR.. Crump in the House, we FORGET
whch) that the chancellor had not refused try them
as required by law but had tried them in cases where
the parties were ready.
.. rs TO the article Of residence: Mr.. Crurnp Of
Cumberland, explained The conduct oftno chancellor
IL persI'tin5 10 live at Needbam, Satisfactorily lie
ceeined tie act ofesabIishipg new district at Fynol
burg as repeating The requisiton upon him 10 live in
Ho"mond. This was the opinion oiabe lawyers, and
the coniemperaneous exposition OF the then House oil
Delegates.
Tie committee refused 10 al, permission 10 bc dis
charged ''' The further investigation Of tie subject
ana determined 10 send 70 Cumberland aud Prince
i'""'' ''f evidence But when they returned 10 the
iI'''c' 'if' miller, member, made motion to the
iioH'e ibat ;hsy be discharged and the motion prevail
60 BY considerable majority. The lateness of the
session certainly had an influence in producing this
'o'e and we hear HAT is determined to renew the
enquiry al tie uoxt session Of the General Assemble