Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1843-01-30

lay The subec, on the iable-bu, waved his motion. a,
/ TIE request of
Mr.. Andrfson who explained tia, tho giving dese-
~ ls,us optional with the debtor; aud the cass in
CURED Vas his own ac Bul IN reply 10 the gentleman
from foaaian. he asked VIM 10 be responsible for
the Clerk, Tie Court? II they take insufficient
fiiy-~ho will be Iospanshtl The Sheriff al present
gives bond and seenf.y-no, 50 the Clerk aud the
Court. but was II jusl impose upon the Clerks aud
The Court the duty oil taking these bonds without
pensaioni II would qnadruple their dniies--it would
TAKE all the Time al tbs Court Negroes nurses, aud all
speees Ut property would be crowded before the Court,
aud deieal all oer business. But he had idea that
The House would impose these duties without c1mpen-
saun--w hoh could be less il,an now paid 10 the
Sheriff. lie moved 10 lay the table, as he had prom
iscd The gentleman from Washington.
Mr. leake huped the motion 10 lay the table would
nai pfesaas The subject had been sufficiently discuss
ed. and the House was prepared 10 vote.
Mr.. Hopkins WAS opposed 10 laying on the table-and
he called The ayes aud noes, and wished the vote to be
considered a test
The House refused 10 lay the table ayes 3s,
81.
Mr.. Edmnads wished To show The difference between
bonds taken by ihe Court aud the Sheriff. The Court
Is NIL rcsp1nslbe # the security makes oath that he is
good the defnot the Sheriff. He takes security
on htsuwn rcsponsbility-and II the security DO moi
good. he has to make II good large portion ol the
magistrates asolVenf. and the creditor would have
resource. lie considered the prop,siou Of Mr. Hop
ss the must absurd and pcpsofous he had ever heard
IL this Hall
Mr. Hopkins always the side Of the grea, body
OF The people lie entered at length III reply Ia Messrs
Anderson and Edmunds. and Ia show that great relief
would be extended the People by abolishlng the
missions delivery bonds clerks fees, and attorney
fees.
Mr. Edmunds said the only question who should
be responsible for trading delivery bondshe slraes
of The sheris The magistrates who are irresponsible,
M the shrs who give bonds to creditors. lie
repeated thai MIR. llopkinss proposition most
slrous and absurd lie suggested that II the gentleman
desired 10 get rid 81 HE double commissions, he should
ttpg ia proposition 10 that eieci;-but mol impose
these unerous dulles upon the Courls-who acted with
oui ANY responsibility
Mr.. SioYal moved 10 reeommIt the Report with in
stneon. report bill preventing Sberllis OF the Com
nnnwealih, f,m charging commissions executions
satisfied by forthcoming bonds.
Mr. Icake. of 4 commended thai the present law was
Designed of The benefit OF the debtor class and that it
would be highly UNJUST require the Sherils take
law had operated beneiealiy-lt was well understood
and 10 alter II would lead confusion, aud SIN
mouths would elalse before the construction Of new
law could be settled.
Mr.. Blue offered tho following amendment Mhcl,
was accepted by Mr. Stova-"And To inquire into the
tXpedency 81 abo.lng The fees ol AtonIcs forth
coming bonds.
Mr. Garrett conceived that no good could come from
the resolution aud amendments, and lac therefore moved
The indefinite posipoaenent ot the whole subject. lie cal
led the pre yious question which was ordered aud the
motion 10 postpone prevailed, by the following vote -
ayes I'll. noes s..
On motion, oil Mr.. Miller, Of NJ. 81,
Ihelouse adjourned.