Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1830-01-08

from Chesterfield, (Mr. Le,gh) gone into ar.u-
The time Of the Committee, proposed tn waive
further debate. Mr.. III. stated that, in moving to
strike the words ''county courts, and TO insert
justices OF the peace" it was his wish TO vest the
judicial power OF the Commonwealth IN the court Oh
appeals, tho superior courts, meaning the general
court the circuit and chancey courts, or such sub
stiutcs for them as legislative wisdom might devise,
and i'm the Justices Thus the county courts would,
like the chancery and circuit courts be altera BILE as
the interests of the State required. The gentleman
had asked lift the policy of the friends of the
ton to distinguish the court of appeals, and place i,
above the control OF the Legislature. Surely, said
Mr.. IL no lawyer of experience will require argument
to prove that the supreme appellate tribunal of the
State should have it's foundations firmly laid in the
organic law. Kis clear that such is he result Of any
ursn Consultation. II the legislature overstcp the
limits of the Constitution, there must be tribunal to
declare its acts invalid: would be mockery to place
this tribunal at the mercy OF the Legislatures; soil
cism in politics. From this reasoning the supremacy
of the court Of appeals arises and the gentleman from
Chesterfield will he the last man to controvert the
reasoning or 10 deny its consequence. Here we all
agrceFarher, in giving constitutional conservation
TO the courts, 1t appears to me we are forbidden by
wisdom end discretion TO 90. The great principle of
policy which Pounds and shields the court of appeals
has no sort of application to the other courts; and
least of ALL to the county courts The general court
which decides ultimately the Lille of citizen. with
the aid Of jury aud the superior of chancery
well as law, to the language o. gentlemen,
to be subjected Ito the whim of the legislature,
while the county courts are 10 DC paced beyond
its reach Is this wise! Is II consistent Is It not
sighting the superior, and nursing the inferior?
What, in the nature Of things, in the merits of the
subject juscs this inversion Of the order of reason
ing, and political actons A plain man, who eslina
ted things according to their actual comparative
lue, would be surprised to hear learned gentlemen
consgning all these great courts. without hesitation
or regret, to the ordinary Legislature, while they de
clared the county courts, too for ITS TOUCH
too sacred for the operation of the discretion of the
Legislature. the judgment of the people. In all
this, think discern, the influence of habit, and
the deluson of prejudice.
The gentleman, said MI H., treats the proposition,
which have the honor to submit, If went direct
y to the abolition of the county this is not
and the committee ought not TO regard il. pro-
pose to let these courts stand where their superors
stand at The disposal Of the Legislature tho pub.
Tic interest may require. 1t is due candor to
that am decidedly of opinion, they ought to be abol-
shed; but the question of their continuation, abo-
iton, is merely sought by plan. to be left open;
while by that of opponents, the hands of the e-
gslature to be always tied whatever may be the
course at public opinion whatever the exgencics of
the State, in all future time, may require. Compare
views farther. We say, If these courts good,
and the community prefers them, the Legislature,
which speaks its voice, will retain them, bad will
remove or change them. What is the language of
opponents1 " Consecrate them. Retain them
forever. Silence public opinion on the subject" Is
not this tacit admission, either that the courts Will
fall by their weakness, that the people not
to be permitted to Judge for themselves in this behalf
The organic law ought to be simple 1t should esab-
sh great principles wnich are true now,
bracing details far only may be necessary to car
ry those principles into action. All the rest Is fair
and proper subject for the operation OF public opin
ion and the public interests new lights, varying
circumstances demand modification changes.
Gentlemen insist that these institutions are the fit
test imaginable; that they full OF WISDOM that their
decisions oftener affirmed by the court OF appeals
than those of the superior courts OF law and equity
Let examine this matter.-A man cannot make
boot, give an opinion as lawyer, build house, in
short he do nothing, which requires skill and know
ledge, any department, without previous study or in
strucon Yet law, the difficult ct all sciences, is
to be seizedby intuition Men are to be born Judges
as they are said be born poets. should be glad
TO know sir if gentlemen would test the sincerity OF
this declaration by taking the opinion ofan ordinary
county court Justice, rather than OF the gentleman
from Chesterfield, when their farms are at stake
That gentleman told the other day, that his child
was sick | take leave to ask him question. Did he
send for Justice of the Peace, a Lawyer or Car
penter to prescribe to the interesting object OF his az
fcctions did he call in Physician! one skilled
studied, practiaed in the healing art? The
swer is easily known Such, Mr.. Chairman, is the
difference between the speculaiions and the conduct
Of ingenious gentlemen. But the argument IN favor
Of the superior capacity OF the justices proves too
much; else courts are radically wrong IN their
structure If they are thus wise, why have any
superior courts appellate courts at alH Why not
rest oil rights upon their decisions ut once and
avoid the delays and charges of appellate itga
ton? Surely ought either to do this, or to make
them the of appeals For lift be true that the
less law mau knows the bettcrjudge he is, the Me-
Sit on the bench ofhe Of appeals. But, sir, it
not true that the court of appeals arms more of the
decisions fthe justices than of the superior COURTS
for of twenty decisions of the county courts that go
to the superior courts of law and chancery, not
than one is taken TO the court Of appeals. And
this is the solution Of the paradox. will add that, If
the judgments Of my old and able friend now
prevented by the visitation ofhcaven from continuing
to the 10Th judicial circuit his useful tolents, had
been reversed by the court OF appeals it those Of
the chancellor who now SO advantageousy acts in that
quarter ofthe state, were to meet similar fate, the
bar of the country would doubt while il s,bmtied
Again, it is urged that sound policy peTsuadcs
TO respect the habitudes and the eery prcJudcos OF
people Admit it; is not this appeal reerabe the
Legislative body rather than To- the convention. Gen
teInen assume too much when they suppose the poo
pie Of the state so welded to these tribunal Is;
sud, " they were, where is the danger Of their abo
tom Do not the zeal and pertnacity with
which gentlemen refuse TO trust public opinion,
clearly show their difhdencc of that attachment
Of the people to these courts? SO much the
aEanmcns and the conrse Of rnnllemen N