Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-01-15

70.
only, was the igh seriously question cd and Thea
was cecid, by this House, that freehold Of Hen
ieo' rssident in Richmond, was eligible for the eoun.
w, me practice OF the coun'y-long settled and e..
'son'ned usags-was, therefore, in perfect harmony
with the lsws.-Mr. Marshall then proceeded iu the
as' pace, 20 enquire whether the amended Consi,u.
uon essosnes new principle In this repect, and
str he choice of the qualified voters of Henrico 70
freebooter OF their county, not residing within the
Corporation lims.-It Is assumed, he said, by those
who contend Tor new rule Of construction that the
question |, (; that new era has arrived
mat no previous law usage or decision, Is to be re.
saried-that the ex sing Consiu ion 10 the soIs
standard 10 which the subject must re referred, and
me sole authority by which Il mus, be settled by
WIS oe Intended, that the present Constitution Is para
winch stands In opposition IT, Mr. NJ ned to the
proposition but ii ii be intended that in the inter.
OF .hat instrument, no regard is to be paid 70
ne stare OF mugs existing antecedeny 10 lite lorna
ton, he begged leavs TO protest against rule Of con-
sirucon, which seemed to be taught with incalcula-
bic mischief and to thre aten the of every
thing which had been hitherto reg ardsd a.
and stable. When difficulty occurs in The con.truc.
ION OF any written Instrument, reason well 10 law
direch, Il at such meaning should be given to the
words, ss had been pr. viously attached 10 them bv
common usage because such meaning must be sup
posed to have been present to the mind Of the writer
Now, II this rule be true with regard 10 soords does
1t not apply. (Mr. NJ. said) with equal reason, and
with equal force to hings7 Could any Constitution,
or any law be framed, without reference, either ,acit
or expressed, to existing things' And shall No
say, that when II is silent with regard them, il
means to leave them unaltered shall We conclude,
mat silence imports an intention to abolish If the
ster be our determination in this CASE and is to form
the rule Tor future decisiop, Cons, ution may be
rot inapy compared to chip, driven upon the O.
cean, without helm compass. Mr.. M. said he had
II in his power and he happy that /, was So 10 sd-
duce on this occasion, and IN support he conceives
oil the doc rine for which he contendng the opin-
ION oil the venerable Pendleon, than whom ADLER or
purer Judge adorned the bench of this or Of
any other coun ry. The opinion given In a case
which was argued and decided in the old Court OF
Appeals soon after the adoption Of the former Cons-
tuion. Mr. NJ said, the County Court Of Fairfax had
decided that the impo, of county levy was con-
trary to the 9th Art of the Bill Of Rights; because
made by the justices, who not chosen by the peo-
Pie and consequently not their representatives. The
decision OF the County Court was reversed, on the
ground that that construction of the Constitution would
De UNFAIR which, under general words and for another
purpose, should exclude from n provision for con,uu.
ing the general administration Of justice in the State
so many particular laws and hat the not
having, n the Constitution restrained the mower Of
laying leves, proved abundantly, that they did not
consider the article in the Bill Of Rights as extending
TO the case MIR. Nj said he collected these principles
ON the ofnnen Of Judge Pendietou-Tha the Con,,i-
TUT had changed nothing by impcation--that words
used directly in reference to subject ought not to
De cons,rucuvely applied to anoher-and that power
which had been exercised before the adoption of the
Con-tituon remained in full force afterwards unless
expressly restrained Apply these principles to the pre-
ssuied practice had prevailed OF eectng residents
to represent the county, in Henrco and other places
,bis Pra.hce was unison with the laws and confirmed
oy the decison OF this House-Can be supposed that
the Convention, with these facts before their eyes,
would not have made a new regulation on the sub.
j.ct ii they had deemed il advabIe The evil is said 10
De monstrous-the usage oppressive-yet, aItho' the
convention sat in this very place, altho' two resi-
dents oil the city wereat the time representing tho
county oil Henrico IN this very hail. not a murmur of
csaPprobaon escaped the Convention not SYLLABLE OF
any kind was uttered on the subject The Convention
made no change, because no change was n,ended.-
he law stands now it stood before the meeting of
that body-whatever rights existed then, remain in
force now If Henrco had right 10 choose her dele
gate from among the city residents she still retains that
linda ni nhna h..
put IL Is commended that the by name of all
the counties and corporations and the Of
representation which appears upon the face of the new
Consuution are equivalent to express limitation of
residence TO the corporations thus in exclu
sion OF the countless and that in this the depar-
ture from the Constitution of I776. The reason rhx
the former Constitution did not enumerate be coun,;a.
Is obviously this. Each county in the Commonwealth
"hou regard to population TO geographical extent
county representation No necessity therefore, exist
ed Tor rehearsing them by In the present Con-
sh luton different rule prevails Regard is paid TO the
comparative population OF the counties. Some having
only fractional value thrown into an election dis
trct TO make unit Of representations others are ent
ued 10 one delegate for each to two delegates and
lew 10 three This diversity of circumstances made
II necessary to name the counties With regard to cor
poratons the same reason and therefore the same rule
prevailed in both instances they in both in
suumenls' But the particular question of residence
which this case presents, is not affected by either
scheme OF representation. The whole process of enu-
meraion has direct and exclusive reference to the
q
delegate He next proceeded TO answer an objection
founded on the Senatorial districts. in the arrange
inent OF these, Richmond Norfolk, and PctershuIo
which are severay entitled to separate
are distinctly named in their respective Senatorial dis
rlcts; while Winchester, Fredericksburg, and other
towns not so entitled, not mentioned in the districts
TO which they respectively belong. Why this dstinc-
hon. II has been asked if IL be not that the corporations
TO which delegates have been allotted by the Copsu-
ton are not placed by that instrument on an equal
footing with the counties, in reference TO eections.
Mr. NJ replied that there several reasons for tbs
diversity lst The elections held at different
places, and at different times in the corporations emit
lied to exclusive representation, from those at which
the county elections held: In the corpora-
ton not so entitled, the elections were identical
with the county elections, both as to time and
in Fredericksburg, did change the principle
The Constitution did In this espe ct than copy
the example oil the pre- existing laws; and 3d. That the
specification was, in some necessary. With re-
gard to Pee sburg for example, the propriey Of the
course is obvious; because that town nstitues
part OF the three senatorial districts, it was absolutely
necessary to TO which should be attached or great
embarrassment must have resulted from the omission
II would have been Impossible TO determine in which
district they should Upon the same principle era
Tor similar reasons the town OF Petersburg is attached
by the law establishing Superior Conrs TO the Prince
george circuit The result is that an inbabitapt Of
any part oil Petersburg is under the mme date iuris
diction OF that court, and other; while by the new
senatorial arrangement he is eligible for the Chester
beid district and other. But any resident, other
wise duly qualified, represent in the House of
Delegates that county Of which the portion Of the
town where he lives constitutes a part In the an.
case the Constitution has made an express change. In
the other il is client Tba the recital by name Ia The
senatorial Of certain tovn, q.