Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-03-23
To THE EDrroRs or THE WING.
UMirersitY Of Virginia, March 1871, Is

Messrs. Editors In your last paper, 1 found an
unmcritcd ccnsurc, of some of the Professors of
this Institution. The author (I.onginus,) appears
to have vented his spleen upon those who, in con-
sequence of the regency OF their appointments,
have not made very notorious manifestation of
their abilities. His true intent is not easily ascer-
tanned: unlike some others i'll his opposition, he is
quite limited; but this may be mere pretence. His
craft probably dictated to him the propricty of
directing his blow at the most tendes, knowing
that to stiiie the prosperity of this Institution, by
making one general assault, was quit#impractica-
BILE. When great Literary Institution like this
Is so highly esteemed, and generally patronizcd
by the most learned and opuent of our country,
the influence of those, who, in their scrutinics,
fnd so little that is disreputable must be extrome-
ly limited.
Upon examining the charges of Longinus it ap.
pears that only two of nine Professors arc in
adequate to the duties assigned them, for in his
ccnsurcs, no dcsignatcs only two, and i'm vague and
indefinite terms, hints at some others, whose celc-
brty appears to be of too general notoricty to be
at this period questioned According to the posi-
ton which Longinus assumes, the Justice of which
deem 1T proper to controvcrt, of our Profess
ors of considerable abilities. l submit it to
them determine whether the University is unwor-
thy of it's fair fame, when vast majority of it's
Professors arc confessedly able men.
But let US examine the foundation of the CHARGE
against those two. Professor Davis came to the
Chair OF Law, at the commencement of the last
oession--bi3 class was then small--not exceeding
seventeen mcmbers-of these some were Students
from other Colleges, and some were Graduates
from other Colegcs--some had attended the Lee
lures of this University, for several Sessions and
were acknowledged to be young men of consider
able requirements. During the whole of that Scs
sion, never once heard Member express displea-
sure at his course but frequent sions heard
them express the greatest satisfaction. Now, if
this very respectable collection of learned younp
men, fully competent to judge of the ability of a
Professor, were SO highly pleased with the valuable
instructions derived from this Professor, by what
authority can one solitary individual say that he is
dchcionti In a Republic, Mcssrs. Editors we
would have no man to forcgo the liberty of speech
or the liberty of pen, but certainly VIC oud have
hIn to forego the liberty of saying that he is right
when opposed TO seventeen, all of whom, have a
better opportunity of Judging than he. Lonpinus
very emPhatically styles Professor Davis a "Coun
ty Court Lawyer" 1t is true that anterior to his
promotion, to the seat which nc now fills, hc did
practice i'll County Court, and let me ask Lon
glnus whether it detracts from his dignity, from
his reputation whether it is degrading to Il Pro.
lessor! Is 1t Incompatible with grcatncssl Have
nor inc greatest men OF the nation, Practiscd in
County Courts7 Yes, Longinus, and since YOU
know that MIR. Davis was Il County Court Lawyer,
IS 1t unfair to ask you whether he did not also prac
tice i'll Superior Courts? 1t is usual for LAWYERS
to practice IN both Courts and if Mr.. Davis be not
un exception to this general rule, why would you
not with the same proprcty, style him Suprri0r
Court Ldwycrl Would you have preferred Pro.
lessor from the Court of Appcasl Remember
that Students do not universally intend to practice
IN Courts of Appeals, but more frequently than
otherwise, they are intended for Country Lawyers
ana that Courts Of Appeals would not furnish
Vhem all with business, If none of these argu-
incntS suit you; do, for moment, consider, that
AZ TINS institution, the Student is not confined to
;,nowcdgc useful in County Courts only, hut that
ms knowledge extends to all Courts 10 those of
Equity, as well as Law, both Inferior and Superior
TO courts OF APpcals-nay, farther, to the S,i.
Premc Court of the United States
honginus in his great solicitudc for the prosper
ny % inc University, expresses much reluctance
at Mr. Davis being preferred 10 MIR. Writ. II ;s
question Of much doubt with me, whether Mr.
~ ~ ~, would have accepted the appointment, even
u II had been rendered him--indccd never before
!ie'iu VT; writ spoken of. Even if it had been
'cidercd hiIn' and nc had accepted, have we any
certain evidence of his superiority over Mr. Davis,
IN legal requirements? Mr. Writ is certainly good
sPcokcr' " by sorno highly approved as poticianI
out III selecting msn 20 iI the Chair OF Law, SO