Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1860-05-18
n 4 fFulv an unfortunate state Of Things,

ets 1t is truly an unfortunate state ofthings. It
could have been prevented. most unaneStionablv. II
the proDe means had have been used at the prop
er time; but to overcome ths evil will require
great active and continued labor. While this evil
Is great and has arisen, must be presumed from
the want OF proper attention, on the part OF Judge
T. there is another evil much greater and OF
much more serious character, permitted by him,
not only to arise but to continue Tor which neglect
or inattention can fever be received an excuse
! or regarded valid plea Of Justification. Judge
Thompson was elected under the Amended Consti-
tuition, adopted the l4th of JAM, 1880 b, virtue
of an act OF the General Assembly passed the 10th
of April 1884, as one of the Judges of ssCircuit SUI
perior Courts of Law and Chanccry established by
that act. He was elected Judge Of this Circuit,
then composed of the counties Augusta Rockbridge,
A amherst Nelson and Altemarle. By that act he
was required to take the oaths of Office, before
tering upon its duties then vested with author
ty to appoint the Clerks of his several Courts OF
the Circuit, and Commissioners in Chancery, and
with chancery jurisdiction throughout his Circuit
giving him power to appoint Receivers, genera.
and special give relief and protect tn. interest of
suitors. The Clerks of the several Courts of the
different Circuits, after their appointment, and be-
fore entering upon the iues OF their respective of
fees, were required under penalty, to take an
oath of office well and truly to exercise the office of
Clerk of that Court, and enter into bond with
one more sufficient securities, to be approved by
the Court, in the penalty of ten thousand dollars
conditioned for the faithful performance of the du-
ties of his ofics" What was his office Certainly
That of Clerk of the Court, and that only, under
ties in that bond eoald never be held responsible for
his delinquencies in the performance Of any other
duties, of the duties of any otheI office.
BY virtue of that act, Judge Thompson, on the
Goth May 1881, appointed Nicholas G. Kinney, of
the town of Staunton, the Clerk of the Circuit Su-
pericr Cour of Law and Chancery for Augusta
ounty and ON the same day, Kinney with his Sc
curities entered into a bond to the Governor of
Virginia for the sum OF ten thousand dollars,
ditioned that if the said Kinney should in al Thu gs
truly and faithfully perform the duties of the office
of Clerk of the said Court, then said bond to be
void. Would such bond bind the securities of
Nicholas G. Kinney for his performance of any 9th
er duty, than that of the Clerk of that Court p
Would it have been any part of the duty of spe-
cial general Receiver that Court to have filled
the office OF Clerk and performed its duties? Ger
tainiy not. Then it was part OF the duty of the
Clerk to act as the Receiver. But Judge Thomp-
son appointed said Nicholas c. Kinney general
Receiver of the Court, and, reported, withoat
any order of tie Court evidencing that appoint
ment, or requiring any bond OF him as any indem-
nifty for his faithful performance of the duties of
that office. Was there ever special Receiver ap-
pointed by Circuit Court of Virginia, to take
charge of the funds of case, however small the
amount of the fund, without being required by the
Court, before taking charge OF that fund, to give
bond with ample security to indemnify the parties
concerned for the faithful performance Of his trust
Yet, this general Receiver, thus appointed, an
without being required to give any indemnity was
not only permitted, but directed by Judge Thomp-
to take charge OF the whole fund of the Circuit
| superior Court OF Law ana Chancery Tor Augusta
county for about, upwards of, twenty one years
amounting, supposed by many, to hundreds of
thousands of dollars, without bling required to
make report to the court of the amount received
in each case, when, how invested, and what secu-
rity taken to secure tbs payment, when demanded
or to keep Receivers book showing those facts,
free to the inspection of all parties Interested DUR
ing that whole period. 1t is thought and feared oy
many, as reported that thousands of dollars will
be lost to the parties in the subject by this wonder
f1l and most unaccountable indulgence of Judge
Thompson to Nicholas q. Kinney But, if any
thing wanting to strike the mind with utter
establishment at Judge Thompsons course in rela-
ton to his receiver, Nicholas Kinney, it NV be
found by referring to the Act OF the Legislature,
passed I'd june 1852. Thab act expressly relates
to the Receivers of the Court requires them sever
ally to execute bond, annually, with such securi-
ty shall be approved by the Court and for sucl!
an annual report of his receipts and disbursements
the dates Of each and in what cases, for the inspec
tinn of the Court, with other acquisitions yet the
said Kinney, executed but one bond and
that more than six months after the passage of that
act aud then only for $50 900, without making any
report, according to the requirements of the act
Can tits conduct of Judge Thompson be explained
as consistent with the duties of his office Let the
ipetple Of this circuit answer the question.
Nav Is, lS60.-lt. JUNIUS.