Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1845-02-10


DKxsn and AcMuLLxx. and aesauved.
MT BoSprRAEr moved attach the nsw county 10 tho
Jadicsl Circuit u Haitian. insssed u Buckingham, The
with business.
1h. w:. .spp0s,,d y sAs nerss - y NJ TAa.s.ss
McMullsn ssd Bspsiss--asl nsgativsd.f fsfl'Tf9
Mr. BoxprRAHr ,hsn moved h i.Asaaiss possponsmsn
of the bill. the Grouad hat the aw had not been com
S, s,s yas .s s:' q = = s y ;:a.:
various rsssoas Why the subject sAoaA - ssss hsck-
Mr. DsSsrs opposed The motion 10 posspess. s.d sz-
planned the position and claims Of the proposed
". and replied ssnsrsly TO Mr.. BondursnI
Both gentlemen made further expressions Of their vews
Messs uosrsoS Of A. and SrASARp slso urged the, hs
provisions 81 ts law had been complied with, and that
time ought To DO allowed FOE examination. before old
the Commonwealth. 80 ll' - 117'la7l
Mr.. THoxrsos Of X supported the bill and stated rsa.
soos why slssra compliance wss not material ~ the par
ties had full notice VI the application.
M.SrAxAap made 90 insfiscnsl uutiun 90 lay the hill
sna motion 70 po.tposs on the table, to give time for
The question then On the motion 10 postpone In
definitely. and was decided In the nss.dvs-.ys. TO-
And the bill was passed by nearly the same vote.
| TEXAS. -
Mr. WALLACE, from the Compteo Of Cooforsnee on the
engagement betwsen The Houses Texas Reso.
utous, made report det.inx tho course Of
and stating the inability Of the committees 70 come to
any agreement on the subject
| On motion OF Mr. Tnonrsos Of X isid on tho table,
On motion 81 Mr. Taoarsos. tho Senate then adjourned.
HOUSE OF DELEGATES. E-a
SATURDAY. February 9Th, ls45.
Reports made BY the various Standing COMMITTEE
On motion OF Mr. WISrRKK, tho resolution OF the Com.
mee OF Courts Of Justice rejecting the petition Of Rich.
ard B,ram for divorce sersed and the petition was
declared reasonable. N
Mr.. MePm.sos Of p. moved thu, resolution Of tho
Committee against the formation Of County Of parts
Of Rockingham and Senandosh be taken up.
Mr.. Coorn and Mr.. DknsoS opposed tho motion. Due
notice had not been given and polls had been held and
he a.f s,s - H. -.
The motion % take up rejected.
Mr. Prrrs moved reconsideration Of the vote rejecting
the bill ,ata"rog the psymen'of sum Of money to.ssc
Hull Of Hampshire. ..-.sH '.--
Mr.. p satisfied the bill ought 10 pas, and having
voted against il, he wished repair the error. 20
Mr. BLUE supported the notion and explained the cir
Mr.. FuLr0s OF W.. opposed the motion-which was
rejected. l.. .l-...-
The following sngrossed bills were road third time:
A bill making sloan to Rector College. Passed.
bill changing the place Of holding separate election
in the County Of Mason and estabshng separate
ton in the County Of Kanswhs. Passed.
A bill divorcing Amanda Crow from her husband Saml
NJ. Crow. Passed. -
A bill for the effecual protection Of Oysters in
Nassawoddix Creek in Northampton County. Passed.
bill spponting Trustees for the town OF Frankfort
Passed.
a bill making effectual provision for running
and marking the boundaries Of counties Passed with
amendment offered by Mr. O'Fenall, embracing the
county Of Morgan1
bill changing the time OF holding the circuit superior
courts o and chancery Harrison
the time Of holding certain in the 10th Judicial
circuit Passed with ryder offered by Mr. Sephenson
bill constituting portion Of Stanton River lawful
fence Passed with ryder by Mr. Stoval, that the
shall apply TO persons owning lands the only)
Judicial Reform.
The bill to expedite in Court Of Appeals and
to prevent unreasonable delay in Chancery causes
up rs the order Of the day. 90
Mr. PRrsroS explained the importance. and urged the
absolute necessity Tor such measure rs this The
court OF Appeals sseven years In arrears with the business
snhuaiy grants i2o Appeals thus aayavating the evil
and putting justice farther and farther those who seek
H. Inns was crying evil-whieh imperously called for
redress at the hands Of the Legislature. Bat
other ev eooec,ed with the mode Of proceeding in the
circuit courts This bill did propose break up
the Circuit Courts. form particular Districs for
chaneery jurisdiction. He knew tbs system Of hold.
ing superior court both Tor law and ehancery in
every county, was popular. and he would not dis
turo that system He proposed that appeal shall 60
TO the court Of appeals where the in
less than $500 franchise freehold He proposed
TO have two chancellors. one East, and West-~ho
not propose TO change the mode Of merely
instituted hear certain cases, which 20
TO the court Of appeals, where they from necessity,
lie for years. without hearing. Mr.. r. said he also pro.
posed to allow the Of Appeals refer certain other
cases, involving matter OF fact this chanee
court BY this eIpedient, Mr.. p. had The authority Of
Of the Judges Of the Court Of Appeals. for saying
that nearly half Of the chancery causes now before that
court would be disposed Of and the business Of that court
advanced fully three yess. Mr.. p in framing this BILL
had had the advice and assanoe Of many Of the abes
The bill also proposed TO abolish the General Court
In the opinion OF all rejecting men, this Court
mere exerescence IL sits than seven days a
year. and costs annually upwards OF $4,000. Tho bust
Of this court he ud transfer the OF Appeals
and the Judge OF the Circuit Court in Richmond. lie would
appropriate the money expended upon the General
Court to deiray the expenses % the Chancslloso
that there would be very small additional charge upon
the Treasury Mr. p also proposed that when Of the
present judges Of the Court OF appeals shall die their
places shall not be suppledbut their daues sha dcvove
of bv The ChanCa Nv Ma
'son there would be saving Of expcnse-an important
consideration in every system.
Mr.. SrRoTHER opposed the bill. lie could not conceive
advantage resulting from this change in the Judicial
SYSTEM He said that 80 long much time is employed
in The consideration and discussion which do
demand it, be expected that the burden OF busi.
will be ighened That he, much as Dir. Preston,
was in favor Of shortening liugation and rendering
ready justice a-bu, the proposed bill would not in his
opinion, effect that object.
Mr.. TAYLOR OF N. b, considered the accumulation Of
business in the If Appeals Of the greatest
evils which subjected. He fully concsned with
Mr. Preston that that accumulation OF business should DO
reduced, but differed with him simply in relation to tho
method OF effeoung it, He with Mr.. STROLLER, believed
that this mighty accumulation OF business entirely
ibuabs tothe unreasonable time taken up the discus
OF He spoke length in opposition the sys-
proposed and advocated scheme which he himself
| proposed 10 offer.
Mr. LEE felt his duty say something upon this sub
jsct. He said that the accumulation in the Court Of APP
peas decidedly evil and the question upon tho
best method Of remedying this evil lie conended that
method had been proposed better calculated produce
the desired effect Than the bill reported by the Committee
Mr. DASIsL Of X. c., concurred in sentiment with Mr.
| LEE
| Mr. McPHEssox Of p. opposed the bill
Mr. FUIToS Of w. had intended to speak in favour OF
| the bill but would not detain the House.
Mr. PsEsros replied 10 the objections urged against the
/ bill.
Mr. BRoApUs Of Culpeper moved the indefinite postpone
ment Of the bill.
Mr.. wIIcmR suggested to the friend. of the bill, thai
be lad on tho table. with the understanding that be