Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-12-17

Petitions we're oitere I'd nd reerred-By Mr.. BoLLI.o,
of Harry b. Gaines Clerk of the Circuit Superior Court
of Law and Chancery for the town OF Petersburg pray
ing the passage Of ac to increase his compensation
tor his public sarvces-By Mr.. EpGISoToS, of Horaiu
j. Mclean, for the establishment of ferry from his
lands at Round Bottom in the county Of Marshall.
across the Ohio river also the memorial OF the Board
of Trade Of Wheeling, asking aid in the construction
of road from said city through the counties of Mar
shall Tyler, MonongGlia and Marion, to Clarksburg IN
The county Of arrson also Of citizens Of Wheeling
the same purpose-By Mr.. Wars, of sundry inhabi,
acts OF Norfolk county, for the passage Of act pro-
yiding for precinct election at Beth.l meeting house
in the parish OF St. Brides in said county-By Mr..
TALIAFEsao, Of John Bondurani Of Franklin county,
for divorce; also Of Benz amin Campbell Of Patrick
county, asking leave to erect dam for purposes
Of machinery Smiths river in said county
BY Mr.. BYRD Of Frederick, memorial of The Bank Of
the Valley in Virginia, praying that the 9Th section Of
the act, passed the 22nd March, 1887, in relation TO
Bank Directors, may be repealed-aso, memorial Of
the President, &c, Of the Bank Of the Valley, praying
repeal Of the provision of the tax bill passed the
session of Ala imposing tax on Dank Stocks -
BY Mr. BRows of T. c. & W., memorial Of Joseph
Segar praying to be excused from the penalties Of
ant.duelling law:-By Mr.. JACKSON, the petition Of
citizens Of Louisa. for precinct election the house
of Nlcaiah Parrish BY Mr. NEAL, ofcitizens Of Par.
kesburg and its vicinity for the establishment ola ferry
from the lands of Thomas Chancellor across the Little
Kanawha river.
! The Speaker laid before the House communication
from the Governor, transmitting The Annual Report Of
the Directors Of the Peniten,ary 1ich was laid on
the table and ordered 20 be printed.
Mr. BYRD, from the Special Committee on the me-
mortal Of NJ p Brooke against Judge John Scott re.
ported resolution, authorizing said special committee
through their CHAIRMAN 20 the dcpostons OF
such witnesses to be taken ay be necessary, touch
ing the charges and specifications contained in said
memorial.
taken up on Tuesday next. This motion sustained
by Messrs. Lacy, Carter, Sroher, Cru,cied, Irvine,
and Taylor, at great length, the ground that every
step should lie taken deliberately in important
matter that of impeaching Judge; and il
very delicate matter 10 decide whether il would be
legal and jus, 10 Judge S. 10 use the dispositions of Wit
nesses, instead of having them confronted with the
accused The motion TO lay on tie table, was opposed
! by Messrs Byrd, Brooke, Williams, and Daniel of
Prince George, the ground that this evidence was
not 10 be used against Judge Scott, but a
preparatory proceeding TO enable the special committee
10 make their opinions 10 the necessity Of going
with the examinations II it is decided that Judge
S. is 10 be npeached then Judge S. should have the
twenty days notice, and every legcl advantage. But,
now, the Judge is not before his trial. II would
moreover, save great expense 10 the Common wealth.
| Mr. DANIEL of Richmond wanted no time 10 deciLe
the simple question of whether charged with
such high offences Judge should not be confronted
with his witnesses.
The motion 20 lay on the table vas Withdrawn by
Mr. Lacy, and Mr.. Anderson moved an indefinite
posponement of the resolution. Mr. A. thought the
proceeding wrong from beginning TO end. Let 60
back and discharge this special committee We ought
to decide upon which OF the two modes directed BY
the Constitution shall pursue, after have heard
! The indictment against Judge S. and his answer.
| Mr. DAsIhL OF Richmond went with the gentleman
from Prince Edward in refusing TO allow evidence TO bs
adduced before the committee, without giving due no.
tice 10 Judge S.; but Mr. D. did not think tina. the
Special Committee should be discharged, as it was the
best mode of conducting the niiiatory investigation
into the texture and complexion of the charges, 10
whether they, prima tacic, would authorize proceed
/ ing against Judge 5.
Mr. IRVINE read the proceedings Of The House in the
case of Judge l. S. Duncan of Harrison, and thought
that the House should take sima' course; TO effect
which, he understood that his friend from Prince Ed
ward was about 10 otir resolution. Mr.. j. repealed
his argument against The iliegay of charging any in.
dvidual without confronting him with the witnesses.
Mr.. EpNuSDs concurred with the gentlemen from
Richmond and Prince Edward, as TO the course 10 DO
pursued. He read the Constitution of Virginia 10 prose
that notice Of 90 days should lie served Judge Scott
the words of the Constitution being "hen The House
about procsrd c He referred 10 the precedent
in the case o. Judge Es, who served with notice.
although there was every evidence OF lis having left
| The State and forfeited his Office
| Mr. BEouS Of Preston was opposed 10 even prefer
ring charge against Judge Scott without good evi.
dence but he thought this proceeding was merely
investgaory, and in the nature Of rule 10 show cause
and was not destined 10 have any final bearing
Mr.. BYRD of Frederick, dsclamed any III feelings
towards Judge S. lie originally thought that The spe
cia committee had been appointed merely TO consider
the charges the face Of the memorial and ret orr
whether there should be any further action in this mat
Ter. But he found majority Of the committee against
b m; and, moreover, his opinion had been changed by
the presidents Of impeuchmen's in Congress- which
presidents had satisfied him that We ought to look
into The tacte SO az 10 ascertain whether there YVES
pri1na ace made not-These mis- had
pursued course similar 10 The one proposed by this
resolution, which he did not think would at all inu.e
Judge s. lie would concur in any scheme The House
would adopt.
mir. IRvISG explained that he thought tina. the she.
cal committee should merely judge Of the legal effect
Of the charges
MIR. b. continued, and would ask the gentleman from
FRINGE Edward, where is the indictment against Judge
s? When no indictment has been found, how can the
Committee or The House give notice TO Judge S.,
Mr. WILLIAMS read the proceedings in the case Of
Judge Green, which very different from the present
case; as The charges appeared upon The face of the re-
cords of the House. MIR. W. thought the proceedings
in the case Of Judge Duncan completely justified US in
taking these dispositions, without giving notice TO Judge
s. The case of Judge Est was not at all analogous
TO the present case as Judge f. had left the State and
ought 10 have received notice Of the proceedings
against him. This resolution was proposed by himeelf
and was not opposed in committee. fie was sure it
wond not in lure Judge s.; The contrary, he thought
would bring Tie matter fairly before the committee
and would certainly great deal Of time in the
prior investigation
Mr. STROLLER had expressed, the other day. the OPT
n:on that the committee should examine the facts oG
the face Of the memorial and then report 10 the House
what ouch, TO be done. But, here, We see the com.
m,ee travelling beyond their duties and calling in
this partial evidence, which must do great injury to
Judge Scott He thought, that if they into any
evidence, they should examre into oil, the nj.
nues-nay, Judge S. himself, wished ii. He held in
his hand spontaneous testimonial from 10 lawyers in
Spo,lsylvana aud Stafford to the superior merits OF
Judge S as Judge and
Mr.. WoRTHIscroy had the kindes. personal feelings
towards Judge S but, as the representative Of ths
people, he had been led to The conviction, that there
precedent here any man had had notice, until
the rery articles Of impeachment read against him.
We are not, now, arruigning Judge s. When the time
Of araignmen does arrive, then we shall be bound 10
give all due notice. He read the Constitution of vir.
GINA sustaining his views; and also the case Of
Judge Chase from the journals of Congrefs. Mr.. W.
maintained, that if we adop, the proceeding by joint
ctinn of hnth Hnnses 10 re- ludte s anrht