Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1828-03-15
Ttrgfnta Hs9is!aturr.
DEBATE IN TIE SENATE OF VIRGINIA. on
TIE CONVENTION ELL.

tleNtdU IRON INeiSOU, VIZ S3DCIl which niniopc M,
controvctted, or attempted to be controye.ted by seye-
raj gentlemen both then and to-day.
Sir, from reflection, aud what little examination !
have been able to give the subjects contained in the
amendment, | have found Do!hiur to induce ,ne q,
iGiangem my opinions; but rsich 10 confirm them. said
on yesterday'th the SIerifs would have no authorize
by a proper cons', uction of the General Law for the q
lection OF members Uf the Assembly, ami that the bill
now under consideration, Should it pass wi,bou, ,I,.
anendmentl to administer any oath 10 the persons of:
cring to vote on the question Of Convention or n,
Conventions; and also said that Sherifs have no an
thority to administer oaths, unless justified by the Com
mon La'', some ancient usage, or by some exprcss
statute giving such authority. think. sir T am ;us-
tilted III these opinions by Common Law itself. and The
laws aud usages oil this country. and i'll did not mistake
the arguments of the learned gentleman from Ches.
terheld, he Is OF the same opinion. pow believe tbe
shoiiHs ought not TO have or exercise The au,boruv of
administering oatirs 10 the electors a, their discretion
as proposed 10 the amendment.
The gentlemaD from Nelson has said. that his almond
ment either contains a new principle or ,l,at il does not.
but I cannot understand from that gcn,leman,s arcu.
ment which, Of the two IDEAS he adopts. E. sir, believe.
his amendment does contain a rew principle never be-
fore adopted, either in England or His country, and one
which we olieh; no; on tue present occasion 10 adopt;
and 50 l viii contend 10 my remarks.
Aac:ent!y tic Sheriff. in England had verv large and
ample jua!ciai authority IN his Torn, (shich was in
fact one of Tic i<,rs's courts nfrecnrd He had iaris
dictioi IN all Cases of treason, felony, auI misdenean-
or, al the common law, cotTHnitIed within his county.
P'r,cntnregnts aud ind ctf1en:z cfa ii such uf-noes were
made ~ bis Torn, and lte had authority 10 issue pro
cess thereon and determine the same. But by ,on.e,,
"hof II was declared tsa, no sheriff sl.cnli h1id Mos
al the Crown, and by tie u.st statute OF E,iw ard the
fourth, the power oi tie Sheriff 10 make out and issue
proceason presentInents and iniictIneuts for treason,
felony, and misjeIasanUr, was take n away. Ye, NOT
wiils:anding these two restraining acts, the SlterrT had
power in his Torn To make presentments OF all common
law tressous, fe!onies, and rn!-dac,earors, bu. he coul5
moi determine iheHl.-flew was bound TO transmit them to
lie justices OF the peace at their next sessions, there 10
Cc prOcGEJSi IN ana Determined. In all fipca cae m
tie Sheriff bad comu!7n hw authority 10 administer
oa;sIs aud lake testiIr0ny. But, sT. we are told by
sNsc old books, last ithas been frequently decided, that
Notwithstanding th.s common law authority, the Sheriff
can take no Jurisdiction of any offence made treason
felony, or misdemeanor by statute. unless the stafute ex
pressiy give jurisdiction III The particular case, and this
b2caIse his lui!cial authority is very limited and ta can
only administer oaths where Le had common law au.
tllority originally.
The Sheriff in England is T. principal cooseryator of
The peace, and has tul all inri!y TO administer oa,,is,
examine into the Offences against the peace. and 10
take security 10 keep tie pesCe-th,5 is a terv ancient
authority. In the execution Of sn;cs process he is
considered as acting il n t'ro fold suthority,--as a Judge,
and "a a ministerial officer. Il is 30 in the execution
o! the W ut OF ieHt!ss!esin, and tie writs OF Inquiry of
Waste, and Ad.neasurcncnt OF Pasture. and some 9th
crs. lie may administer oatls in the execution Of his
duties nnder these x'its, for they are considered as
commissions, ard whatever judicial authority he may
exercise uya!er them, he does not from the common
Law, bni BY authority Of the courts from whence ;bcv
eHianatc. il is his duty 10 ascertain certain facts in =
Judicial manner and perform certain ministerial duties
and make return thereof 10 court.
II has been decided chat no presenrInent c3n be de
termIaed IN the sheriii's tori foe tai>!eneanors concer
ming the repairs Of he pubic vCg=js in England; and
This, because the sheriff IN his tom. bv the common
Law, can hold no pleas concerning the freehold; and
because these nj ieDaa lnrs were declared by several
aia:n;es, zone ci whi"!., gives him Jurisdiction 10 eXa
mi'e and determine such casse; although i've has juris-
d c'ion over ccpnn.On law n.IedcU,eonoiS 10 certain ex
tent.
\ ttIrtS an II IL ypTr rp-t-;o Uo ,t1:Gjo,, -. .a.
eT III England 10 administer oaths, unless authorized
by the co'amon law, orcTr resiy authorized by statute;
and 1 presume the sher:ds here are confined 10 their
cannon law rowc.s, except where those pow ers arc
changed by the act OF assembly in particular cases.
Sir, tie duties Of sierifTs 80 England. in the election
ofmembefs OF the House Of Commons arc held TO be
chiefly ministerial dh:ics. IL is presumed tie sber.fTs
know ali the people of their counties, both IN the exc
cution of process, ami ID the election OF members Of
the House OF Commons. II is presumed thew know
all the qualified electors, and al! who are not qualified:
and 1t is their duty in tbs elections 10 take tue votes of
those who are qualified and no others.
If any sheriff in Eusla,E refuse 10 POLL a qualified
electors vote, wneu required SO 10 do, il is a violation
Of his duty, and al his peril; for an ac,ivn on tie
case may be maintained against him; and both The iDiu.
red candidate, I'D the eleCtor whose vote was rejected,
have a right to demand Of the sheriff a COPY of the poll
taken, for their own benefit to be used against him
Yet The sncrjfs there never had authority 10 REQUIRE
any oath Of the eiectors.-they have never ateuipted
10 exercise any such right! Several statutes have been
passed auihorHIng hoes against the sheritis for iinpro-
per coujuct IN elections. FOR come offences one hun
drcd pounds, and Tor others, not exceeding forty pounds
may be recovered against them. But believe no STA
tutc ever took away The right 0fjtjured parties to their
action on the case; tor did any statute ever give the
sle5'fis authority TO require any oath Of electors. BY
The common law they Savc no such authority; they are
bound TO act AT their peril; and they are therefore under
the strongest mofi"os TO do right. : believe Sir. This il
the law ofEngiand at this time.
But. sir, a different course in sorac respects was pur-
sued in this country at a very early day. IN 1860 the
HCuseof Burgesses hued Martin Baker, sheriff of Neyv
Kent county, five hundred pounds Of tobacco for ex-
eFcising undue Influence in the election Of Burecsses for
that county, without the authority Of any law on the
subject. DO not know under what nuthoSity they
acted. ] am unable 10 determine whether thew consi,
G6rcd MS bad conduct as a Coniemp' to Ire Governor.
by whore authority the writ Of election was issued. or
as a contempt to tie House itself | believe The House
nf Commons seldom, fever exercised any sych autbo.
rity. ! know Of no such case. Elections there. are
held under the Kings writs Of election, and If any she.
| riff exercise undue influence IN any election, il IS no
] cont nu1nt ~ fine ITnusn. bDf 10 fMp Kip-r, an1 fb, Iy.-,o