Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1829-02-05


The motion VAS supported BY Messrs Craig.
Smii4 ofGreenbrief. l. Nelson. T. VAS carried
wiihoui > division.
Mr. Duncan moved IN rerommit the It'll,
with lhe view III providing lhsi Nr White be
required 10 print The losl journals If they lie
hereafter found.
Mr. Nelson, supported by Dir. Doddridge,
move It's reference Ia select eofnmlt.ee.
which wss sgrs"d to. snda committee aPpnin.
ed, consisting OF Messfs. Nelson. Dun can bod
ridge. Anderson of Bot. Craig. Smith OF
Greeahrier, and Smith Of Keuasha.
vi. Mason Of Fl .derick, called up the re.
port of he COMMITTEE of 6Dauce, releasing the
sureties Of John Preston from th.ir obligation
20 the Comm uwenih.
Mr.. Mason Of frederick said fhat a further
eIrm,nalion Of the .ubject had satisfied bun.
that the peii ioners WIRE enuIled to relief: and
thar morals and cDnsciencp. required The Com
inonwealth g. reiea,e them from liability. (dr
VI recapitulated M" principal facts. a. that the
defalr stions Vi John Preston, occurred suteri-
orio the periioner's becoming h 5 survtIes--
thar this fact was conciasiyely established AZ the
triai-And. that the judgment had gone against
them by poini of Law raised by the court
which point OF law WAS that the surefies "ete
stopped from fn'slising the Treasurer books ;
although full handed with proof we're excluded
by the books, iron, proving thai the delalca-
ton he'd occurred hefor. they beeane SUI cites. J
Inc count viii ch pronounced this judgment said
Nj NJ was the court Ot ultimate res ~, and
although iis opinion va unanimously condein,
ned b, ihr whole community although It wa
against all law, the stcurltIe, were hound by Il
hand aud foot. Fortunately for them. thu eour
oi appeals had since, la the case OF MunfoTd L.
the 4yerssers oil me poor oi Soltoaay. revised
and reversed the principle decided b. the spe !
Al couf The decsion of The coIri hal been
reviewed with great dcbri alton. aud pTuunun-
ccd to he Law. illerr hr. i. read hon ,
Randolph, he opinion Of The couTI IN he case o
hunford and the Oyerstrrs.) Mr.. VI. Tsked II
there could lie a more m0nstrous propositions
than IN exact from th"se individual, money
for whIrh IA law and morals, they Nrre
bound II had been aid that il eas danger
,u> principle for this Legislature 10 reverse the
declsIous OF The Court of Appeals. That va,
not asked--it was asked TO sustala the derIs, II
Of taaf Court. Nj. u. commented n Other
acts OF thr cas-" rs he injunction obta lued bs
the Commonwealth prohibiting the sac of J.. -
tons estate uy winch the securities had bern
improper subjected TO pay 'nterfsi, and he
fore which was dissolve ri. prop ,ty had sustain
I'd a great depreciation IA vaur-ss giving
them IN. stro INCEST equitable claim 10 reiirt
Every Consideration OF law, conscience and
Ramp ,exsc,ed in hls opinion, relief from lii,
commonwealth 10 the priiiione $.
Mr. NltCher sud he was not yet satisfied
that the sureties were not legally aud Justly
bound. he sureues of John Pr, ton were sn.
rctes for his honor and integtity-and he tho'i
that n false enITy upon his books IN the year toi
which fhey were bound was as mnca a VIOLA
tirn ofintegruy, as II ne hai in that year EN-
bezzled the commonwealth money To sus
Al II
He DOUBTED { the case cd'd by the gentleman
from freder,c't. WAS in po'nt-s d ye, more II
the secarti- lad received the INJURY suppose ed
by the injuuciion ohiainrd toy tie common.
| " ealth, OF the depreciation of real estate For
Que, he had though, and he still thought, fht
Judgment oi the court JUS. and this House mad
four years go, alter foil discussion. refused b.
= large vote to rrease the securtIes. They
haa ne ali 'ndoned IT, but as tie 1Lir Mas
I getting rusty, an our recollection OF il more
| FAINT, the application was ag in renewed He
thought the preC, deut dang ruus, and ~ should
vo'" against
Mr. Doii0dge sad he fet diff ulty in vo.
! ing 10 K W an entire release. Ill, preferred o
| an tue suIetrs II new tridl, tor lac too thought
! tue Jud4 ment erroneous, though he would moi
! call il monSrou3. Alr ID. related - faci that
| had led the Legs aturr 10 obtain the inumctIou
|
! conveyed large estates TO secure an inderen-
| deot property to ceftaia Of his children, md
he contended that during the the Of that n.
junction, (lS2l property had not lie reciate &,
| aud even II u mad the suretIes might bv pIupef
! steps have procured = sale Of the estate ny tn
| fneent OF The Cnu,mouw eaIth NptwIin>tand.
| ng he thought th"n eniitrd To notr ef on this
| ground, ne would vet 60 far as to grant them u
| ne'' trail, believing as he did, that the judg
! W. - which they we're concluded was erlo
neous.
| VI, Bsqcs replied 10 the argument of Mr
| WnCher. that he suretfe.. were the suretieS oil
the lntrgr y add good behaviour of johu Pres
| ton. The committees of this House had re
pc.ned'p reported That NIL was we'll aud thus
! even credit TO Preston and nduc d that con
! n lencr which is surrtir: irh III him He wa,
sure thai lie gentieman would deliberately
examine the case, he WoIIi come 10 the cOncu
SION with the COMMITTEES of finance.
! Mr.. Doddridge hoped the House would per.
| nit the resolution 10 assume ,hr shape oil nil
! wb"n II could he modified 60 mret II coucui
| renee, aud Mr. Bfycs agreed .n TIE pruprItty
| OF the course.
Mr. Eppe' said the enquiry was, Il this cas-,
were n"~ TO be tried. cnul the common~ eau
again obtain judgmcnt against the sur,ties
II ~ could not ought il Ia INSIST upon decIslor
unjust aud illegal He a'gucd AGAINST the "a.
lidnv oil the esloppeI app Ell 10 tn securities
and reminded the II .use thar john Prestuus es
tate WIS not snugl, 10 he released. bul his Soca#
| rites. lie should support the resolution.
Nh. " tcheT SAID he wa glad 10 see that III,
lawyers by ~hrm he "ns surrounded ioug ht
shy, md had noi touched the Iniy position h,
had taken nAmely, that the secutlies were
guarantees for the integrity OF their principal
at f.uX i,
ton OF the views OF other grurleme,,, aud in sup
port ii his own.
MIR, Dodir'I;s end Nj. Bryce. replied TO Mr.
Wtchef aud the la ter r.Jomed. lie said thai
| the case LON Randolph in which the Court oil
Appeals had revised the decision the superior
cCntt, had bren adIad,cated since The death o
Judge Roane, and he beloved 1t the latter were
alive. he would revise the Judges who had rcvjs
I'd him. He had mere couGdrnCe in that couri
when he sat At its head than he had now.
Nj. Craig expressed his ,trong doubt Of The