Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1845-02-11

IL,
Messrs. COOTES and DENISON opposed The
taking up as none OF the requirements oil the law
had been complied with.
Mr.. MCPHERSON admitted thai the polls had
not been taken-but said that The notices had been
properly published. Moreover. the Legislature
had, under similar circumstances, grained SINH
lar petitions.
The House, by large majority, refused 10
| takeu
MIR. PITTS moved 10 reconsider The vote re-
Jeciins the engrossed bill, authorizing the pay
men' OF sum OF money (SS) TO Isaac Hull Of
Hampshire This motion was sustained by
MessTs PITTS and BLUE, opposed BY Mi
FULTON of Wythe and negalved.
The following cngrossed bills were read a third
time and passed:
Making loan for the benefit of Rector Col
lege;.
Changing the place Of holding a separate cleo
ton in the county of Mason, and also establish
ing a separate election in the county Of Kanaw-
ha;"
"Divorcing Amanda Crow from her husband,
Samuel M. Crow"
"For the more eilectual protection of oysters in
| Nasswaddox Creek in Northampton county,"
| "Appointing Trustees for the town Of Frank
| fort"
"For making more ehectua provision for run
ming and marking the boundaries Of new coun-
ties" (amended by ryder, on motion of MIR.
| OFcrrall;)
Changing The time of holding The Superior
| Court of Law and Chancery for Harrison coun-
| ~, and changing the time Of holding the Courts
OF the 10Th Judicial Circuit" (amended by ry-
der, on motion Of Mr. Sephenson3
Constituting portion Of Staunion river law
lul fence" (amcnded by ryder, on motion Of
Mr.. Stovall.)
On motion of Mr.. DAY, the Report of the
Committee on Courts, &c against the petition
| Of Margaret Anne Warden for divorce, was
taken up, and said petition declared 10 be reason
able.
Mr.. STREET called up Report from the
Committee on Courts, &c. against The petition Of
Henry G. Hopkins, TO be relieved from a for
feitcd rccognzance, which was agreed lo-Mr.
S. having made an Intellectual motion TO reverse
the decision OF said committee
COURT BILL.
The order Of the day came up-being the bill
''To expedite cases in the Court OF Appeals, and
10 prevent unreasonable delay in Chancery
causes in the Circuit Courts"
Mr. PRESTON explained the bill The
Court OF Appeals is now seven years behind the
| husiness-in other words suit now brought 10
said Court cannot be decided for seven years.
| Great and universal and just complaints were
| made in every section OF The State. This bill
provides, that no Chanccry case shall 90 10 the
Court of Appeals, unless it amounts 10 800 dolls
lars or be freehold or franchise, or title or bound
Of lands, or claim for freedom In order TO allow
! appeals in cases under 800 dollars The bill
establishes two Superior Courts of Chancery Tor
the Eastern District, 10 be held at Richmond, and
| for the Western District to be held al some place
no, fixed in the bill, and TO those Courts such APP
peas are allowed. The bill contemporaries, tina,
mere matters OF errors in account, or matters Of
! fact Gas in the long case of Newton rs. Pool
may be SET down BY the Court of Appeals 10 these
| Courts Of Chanccry, where the errors may be
corrected by competent master in Chancerv,
instead of consuming unnecessary time, as now
Again, the bill provides, that where the subject
matter admits of severance on an appeal from any
decree, &c, of either Of the Superior Courts OF
Chancery, The Court OF Appeals may grant an
appeal on that portion only which is the subject
| OF controversy, leaving the inferior Court 10
force The balance Of The dcc1ec, Sc, mol inquired
into by he Court cfAppcals. The bill further pro-
vides for aboishins the General Courr, as being
very costly and unnecessary, and transfers 10 the
Court OF Appeals the jurisdiction over criminal
eases, now exercised by The General Conr. 1t APP
proprates the 5000 dollars which the General
Court now costs, TO the two Courts Of Chancery.
| IT, hereafter, one or more vacancies shall occur
| in the Court OF Appeals by the death or the cleo
ton OF one or more judges 10 the office of Judge
Of the Superior Courts Of Chanccry, such vacan-
cics shall not be supplied, but the Court of APP
peals shall consist OF four or three Judges, as the
case may be. The money thus saved by cuTtail-
| ing the number of Judges, will be also appro-
prated 10 the expenses OF The Two Courts OF Chan
| cery
Mr. STROTEER opposed the bill. He thought
the present evils sprang from the dilatory manner
| in which the Judges Of the Coul. of Appeals con-
| Quoted The business flour Judges worked as in
dustrously and energelically as in England, and
in other States of this Union; and the business
we're conducted with more dispatch, and shorter
speeches, we should not hear such clamorous
complaints. Mr.. s., at length, argued against
the policy of the notifications OF the judiciary
system, provided BY this bill. Mr. S. contended,
that our Judges should receive a more liberal
compensation, and thereby be enabled, without
the embarrassment Of private affairs to devote
their whole minds and bodies TO their judicial du-
ties
Mr.. TAYLOR OF Norfolk Borough regretted
10 be forced to oppose the bill. He thought the
delay complained of was the inordlnate Time Ia
ken up in The Court OF Appeals in the discussion
of cases. The Legislature should remedy this
evil MIR. L. thought it ought 10 be provided,
that the arguments in the Court OF Appeals
should not be oral, unless required By the Court;
nut sIOulu uG WHICH plint+N vi bosh
the expense of printing 10 he al The expense OF the
cause. He made special allusion 10 the case OF
Newton and Pool, which had consumed 81 days
of argument alone Mr.. L. thought we shonld
provide for four shorter terms Of the Circuit
Courts, instead of Two, rs al present. BY this
means The Chancery business might be better
dispatched by assigning one or more terms spe-
cially 10 the Chancery causes. Finally, MIR. I.
thought We should enquire into the expcdieney OF
limiting the amounts for which DEGREES OF Chan
cery Courts shall be carried, BY any means up 10
the Court of Appeals.
Messrs. LEE and DANIEL Of Richmond city
thought we should take this bill as an entering
wedge for further Improvements. The bill was
not entirely periect-but it was all that was offer
ed, and we should accept this for the present. II
NAV be amended hereafter, so as TO make il more
perfect.
The bill. # would produce more delay and in
crease The costs.
MIR. EDMUNDS of II. hoped the vote on the
engrossment would be made lest vote.
MIR. PRESTON had no personal interest in
this important matter; but it should not be hurried
through; as there were many gentlemen, who did
not wish their votes now 10 be considered as test
votes. :,
Mr.. DAVIS Of X. & @. hoped the vote would
not be made test, as he was not now prepared to
vote.
Messrs. FULTON Of w, JACKSON and
MCPHERSON OF Page thought the House fully
prepared TO vote now. They hoped the vote would
be made a test.
Nfessrs. ANDERSON, COOKE and BROAD
DUS of Caroline appealed to gentlemen not 10
make the present vote test
Mr.. PRESTON briefly replied 10 the objec-
lions made TO the bill, and set forth the advantages
OF the changes proposed by the bill He referred
10 The Vice Chancellor in England, who settled The
questions of account and matters OF iacL-the
Chancellor having nothing 10 do but 10 decide
questions OF law.
Mr.. BROADUS Of Culpeper thought the
House now prepared 10 vo;e-and the best means
10 test the sense of the House was by motion Tor
Indefinite postponeinent which he made.
Mr.. Preston called the ayes and noes, and ap-
peaed 10 gentlemen who wished for time TO re-
fleet, to vote against the indefinite postponement.
5aE,. .to1tt Nv