The Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1822-1829, 1828-02-18

Qae.n' 'riaL irfure Inst irilHiusi Gu bufh
al itetr occasions, ihai par of lie body, who
were dspsuden! upon the Influence oil tie
crow lar their reelection, Il mean The sii.
teen .ateh Peen.) msaiiesled theit subsef.
vienct To- pawrr. By voting, 20 man, with
the wishes ol ihe Crown whist the English
aud q q Irish Peers voted against tke Crown,
disreg1tling al considerations, but he honest
convictions 81 their own Judgment, Mr. !.
eonsidere8 ilis san instructive commentary
on the esils oi q dependent Judiciary. On
tic other hand what glorious examples result
ting from Judicial Independence, has our
oRn country afforded Our whole history
furnishes one great and one continued exam
PIE.
I Mr. T. ssid, that without Intending 10 be in
sidi1Hs, he would single out two instances 10
present 20 the attention OF tho House. The
6fsi vas The ttinl al The British soldiers III
bostos. on the eve oil the Revolntion-in
tHsf case the charge was wlful murder. The
facts we're. thai n detachment Of soldiers, sia-
tiragd At ibai place. being Hssailed by an an
- MOI. 1T vas revolutionary times) by the
= ardsr OF tRsir commanding officer, bred upon
aud killed several OF the hssaianis The ac-
eg.ed were arraig ned, amidst cries for ven
F s~anrr--the crowd shouted " cruelty them
+ The personal safety ofthe Court aud Coun-
&
I vat Of their coadomnhiion The oommunl.
j IA wes IN arms. Rebellion, ~ it IS called,
/ lad reared IT, crest Personal and political
! resentment conspired to RAISE a torrent NJ IN
| dignailon. That udieielindepen denoe alone
/ co Id stem lit did stem IL. The stream OF
J justice pursued the even tenor OF It's way u :
/ rufiied lay political expedieury or popular fu-
/ ry. he accused were acquitted and that
acquitnl Is now celebrated by Historians Of
| his and other countries, as an immortal fri.
UNI OF moral courage aud Justice, in the
Indge, over passion and popular prejudice, mn
! mp flshablr monument the benefits result.
| InR rom judicial independence Mr. r said.
| the Sihrr case 10 which be alluded, was the
trial Of Aaron Burr. he did not refer "a It
| for The purpose oi expressing any opinion up
Oh ihr merits Of the accusation, or the moral
| guilt II the accused He WIS now fallen. e.
| MIR took no delight in adding TO thai edp
OF misery, already tull to overioWiuR--no
| did Mr. ! refer 10 II for the purpose of AMI
! madrrrllnE upon The parties nf that day Hi
purpose simply wssto call the attention Of
! the House 10 II, ms II Was, IN his Judgment,
case which exhibit, i in high relied, The inssti
mahlc advantage OF The independent ten.
are Of The nnciaiy. MIR. ] admitted, tint NJ
the time, tn young, he parto0i, 81 the gcuer.
al Indignation towards The Hccused. His con
vic ION WAS loudly demanded by the popular
! lee ing; but now lhatt asperliy olpurty had
| subsidized, and we ARE capable OF viewing the
| suhluct thro the calm lights pf moral pllloso.
ply we all rejoice atthe arqniiial Of the ac-
used heeaD,e, approving a. We now do of
III" itenl opinions Of the judge, conviction
would hive liked stigma on he Rdmlnisira
ton and tHrulshed the ermlne Of Justice
| whist acqn,tlal huS honored aud exalted the
humanity aud tho wisdom of the law. When
we reflect uron The -inle Of feeling thenrEisl-
ling, may we np'. &IbuUt di,pdrH sIng tue
moral or iniellectual attributes OF the ereat
and good nun Nhp presided over that tfia,
pronounce" that hr"t somewhat, though MOI
altogether, indebted IA the independent ten.
IRE OF Office Tor the power, courage aud cnpn.
c'9 - re st the tide Of popular feeling, and
10 achieve 50 glorious u triumph over deep
roolrd prejudice, under circumstances SO
wrli calculated 10 bias and mslead the jude
mrnt
M. T then commented IN III, details Of the
| bill. which he sand wrre drfeetlpp-rcifrring
sections containing hose defects H. sad lnote.
over that the additional expense thar would b,
incurred by the passage OF the till was worthy
Of notice, especially IN these tying aud difficult
times ni pecunlar. emb,rfassment He hnnrd
| he wasnnt one off" penny wise x pound.ioolish
| legislators oiWhem the gentleman from Rcrke
| Icy spoke on another occasion. Mr. I sad h.
would not be iggardy Of expenditure 70 IN
| p osc 'hc Judic . system of tfr STATE: bur he
| could not conseutto paw trem - to $1,000 n
perhaps, more for tic work uf distinctions or II
| say The Vcty least Of =. Tor making a b,d Sys
ten according 10 tys gentloman's nplniousl
worse.
Mr 7 said he begged leave briefly to reply
10 an argument that had fallen from the gentle
man from Charles CIV in Committee OF the
| Whole lie had lad down the proposition that
re legislature could alter, remodel or abolish
lhdiclM systems 1t u, viii aud pleasure that
therc vas no check upon them bu, their own
s"nse ofthc expcdiancy or inpzpeuiency Of the
measure aud 10 sustain INN in the proposition
| hnEefe1ed to the aotot Congress of 1902 that
| had swept ava, tic midnight Judges, as he ter.
| med them Mr.. !. snrd names hid neither
charms nor tertors for him He thought the
| genllemAn'> a most uahappy illustration for his
| his own side Of The question lie thought il pro
| vrc "a hat otherwise might have been Terardcd
As IN Idle fesr) the danger ofihe legislative en-
| =, ohchmg upon the judicial department, To- II
piesenteda case ~ point Mr. T. said whilst
ne one that had ever gloried In the poll ical
| rrinmph Of ls0l, he vas constrained 10 admit
hal HE act otltglsation referred TO by the gen.
,emsn repeating the judicial system Of 1901 was
| 70
| - hat ny resentment and flushed with conquest
| NJ ] said IT was the opinion OF our ablest Jur
| .tsHud some u our best Statesmen that the ~
- ls0l making the district Judges and render
ng the suprettc Court Judges atiunary, was a
use measure, Mr., T believed it. and he be.
Iieyed that IT. repeal was now ,ubjec, of CON-
| rnpn regret
| Mr. T. trusted he had already answered the
| argument e the gentlemen from Berkeley, pre-.
dicatrd on the saving OF cHpense aud removal OF
delays. which he contended was to result from
| his bill MIR. ]. here repeated his conviction.
mat neither the faVorite objects of that gentle.
man would BE- accomplished, but on the contrary
The evils complained Of aggravated. The argu
nieni OF the gentleman, as 10 the superior ad
| vantage ofrta t5tc, over written testimony was
certainly misappiied, because this bill has no
! provision changing the k'nd OF testimony TO be
! received in Charcery Courts II remains the
Z -