Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1860-05-15
. For the Spectator.
Judge Thompson, Court Docket, and Recei-

Juuse AnOMPsOns Court DOCKET, and Rece1-
Ia vershfp.
Messs Editors in my last communication. afte,
showing that a Judge should have true dignity o.
character and department; the effects of his wan
Of that quality the qualifications of Mr.. Fult,
for the Judicial office according to the requisi
tons of that law. far as his Character bushes,
habits legal qualifications, fondness for his profes
sion, and attention business furnished evidence
and the qualifications of Judge Thompson for that of
fee, in part, as to his temper and manner, by the
same law from the evidence of his judicial life, com
menced the investigation of his care and attention, in
performance of the duties of his office. Before pro
ceedng with tnat examination the importance of the
subject seems to- demand some notice of the temper
and department too frequently exhibited by Judge
Thompson towards parties in Court, when rendering
his opinion and in the decision of their cases. The
before stated, is the duty of the Court; but when
Court, while protesting to make such decisions, un-
necessarily and publicly, before the assembled bar
and people imputes improper motives to party or
parties in the cause arragns that those parties up
on those motives so imputed, tries, and condemns
them guilty of designs or offences, thus imputed
Inferred it right not warranted by justice,
power not supported by the law of the State, and
commits act not only Of injustice, but frequently Of
the greatest outrage against the feelings of the par
ties, thus charged tried and condemned, and some.
times against his their most sacred rights and in
terests They are tried and condemned, on charges
sustained only by the evidence of suspicion, without
the privilege Of rebuttng that evidence, Of
showing the suspicion to be wholly unsupported by
the circumstances, and thus without foundation
By this course parties in Court not unfrequenty have
their feelings most uDjustly and cruelty wounded,
their character and of their helpless and unoendng
families, ruined, and vexatious and expensive suits
Instituted against them with really of action
except the charges ntimated made by the Court
In all such cases there is mOnstrous Injustice
How far or how often has Judge Thompson shown. in
his Judicial history, this want of true dignity of char
acter and department in his official duties? Let the
people of this Circuit answer the question. feeling
sd nf kHo
pears to have distinctly marked Judge Thompson's
whole Judicial life, and to have governed his actions;
and, having shown that an independent Judiciary
responsibility, in his official life and acts. has been
equally marked. Resides he appears to have been
governed by feeling of literary vanity. Who could
resist this conclusion, after witnessing him In court
while addressed by the members of his bar? Does he
listen to the arguments of the counsel? He certainly
does not appear to do SO; he rarely looks at them
while addressing him, makes no note of their argu
read. He has, reported sometimes shown an aver
sion to hearing discussed, though 1t were IN
tended an insult to his understanding All this proves
him greatly wanting n proper dignity OF character
and department. well as In good TASTE Ii is true
that in his decisions he is reported to show much
better knowledge of the views, arguments. and au-
thorities quoted, than his apparent attention to the
arguments would Justify but it is believed that II ne
were to give greater attention to the arguments OF
counsel, and to the authorities quoted and read In
those arguments the nuber of his decisions reversed
by the Court Of Appeals would be most astonishing
ly reduced. now return to that doeket As already
stated, one of the duties Of Judge is to keep his
Court dockets wlthin the control OF the Court. In
my last communication / stated that when Judge
Thompson was FIRST elected to the judicial Omce OF
this Circuit, the common law issue docket OF his
Court for Augusta County. must have been very small
for that docket at the June term 1885, contained only
about orty-fve cases that the number OF cases was
permitted to increase, from year to year. ustl tne
June term 1S43 when it amounted to about two hun
dred and forty-fye cases; and that the number was
permitted to vary from tne latter period to the year
1854: when il amounted to about two hundred cases.
further stated that there were several provisions
made by the Legislature to prevent that increase OF
the docket but apparently without any recognition OF
the Court. 80 ai
deem it proper to be more specific in the analysis
of this docket that the of it's increase may be
made fully manifest. The common-law issues OF that
Court for Augusta county, reported for the June
term, 1885, were only As cases /; for the June term
1885 4s for 1887, So for 1888 ll5 TOR 1872 aS for
$780, 90; for 1S4, 1871; for 1s41 117 for 1843, PA
and for 1874, no cases. Here it must be seen, that
this docket was permitted to increase annually until
the latter perod when it contained nearly four times
the number of cases. that it did at the June ter 1885,
Why was this permitted? The Legislature seeing
this growing evil and that if it not speedily re-
moved would result in virtual denial of justice
to sutors By the necessary delay in the trlal Of the
the subject. The act Says "That from any cause
amy of the Judges of the Circuit Superior Court OF
Law and Chancery of this Commonwealth, shall fail
dispose of all depending in their respective
Courts and ready for trial therein it shall be his duty
appoint special session of such courts, which shall
be held in the manner and under the provisions con-
tanned in the 18th section OF an act passed 10th april
1884," This act was in force from its passage Did
the passage of this act escape the attention OF Judge
ThompsonY If so it ought not to have done it be-
cause his duty required him to take notice OF all such
acts yet from his permitting the docket to increase,
after s passage even more than before, 1T must be
presumed that it escaped his attention unless indeed,
it be shown that he held special session of his Court
according to the acquisitions of the act. He should.
however have kent the dockets reduced and have held
special sessions his Court sufficiently often to have
accomplished that object. This he certainly did not
The Chancery docket, it will be found, was also per-
mtted to increase, though not In the same proper
ton. The common-law and chancery docket OF that
Court for Augusta county at the November term 1885,
as reported amounted together to about 255 cases. at
the November tenn, 1889, to AIS cases. ana az tne
number. At the November term, 1848, the common
law docket of that Count contained about 2o7 cases.
and the Chanoery docket about 258 making together
545 cases. Here it will be seen that, while, between
the November term 1884, and that of l848 the docket
did not increase, but with such an immense docket OF
that Court. besides the four others constituting the
Circuit, 1.-The wheels of Justice" moyed aSososy and
must have appeared likely TO ;soon case to roll on
This grievance had arrived at such magnitude,
and had become SO oppressive to the people OF this
Circuit that the czens suitors and members of the
Bar residing in all the counties of the Circuit by me-
MORALS to the General Assembly setting forth their
grievances obtained the passage OF an act, on the
9th of March, 1S4s making it the duty and requsl-
ton of the Judge of this Circuit after the adjourn,
ment of the last terms of his Courts, Spring and
Fall to appoint special terms of his Courts apd TO en-
ploy his Summer and Winter vacations 10 holding such
special TERMS flor the dispatch of chancery business,
only" be continued according to the pleasure OF the
Judge, so not however to encroach on the regular
terms Of the Court, THIS duty and reqpsition were
to continue FIVE years from the passage of the act
For this extra service the Judge was to receive ve
hundred dollars year, addition TO his salary, pay
able quarterly, besides mileage at the fate OF twenty
cents ame in going to and returning rom saia onan
Gerry sessions and be excused from his attendance on
the General Court If in conflict with any OF such sRe
cial TERMS These special terms were to afford all the
power of Chancery proceeding as the regular terms OF
the Court 1t has been published to the world one
of the writer's in your paper that after the OF
this act making it the duty, and requiring Judge
Thompson to hold, thus ecal terms ct the Chance
ry Court, she conquered the docket is that state
ment true2 1t certainly is not. But did ne hold
single special term Of the Chancery Court in Augusta
county during the five years next succeeding the pas
sage of that act? AS reported, the records OF that
office, not only emphatcally deny that he did. but
most conelusigey prove that he did not Then hon
did he conquer the docket by thai act if he paid 1t not
so much attention. as to hold single Court under its
provisions? But the docket of that Court for Au
gusta county really reduced at all after the passage OF
that act while the independent and irresponsible Ju
dietary system continued to exist? At the November
term 1848, as before shown, there were on tne COM
mon-law docket of that Court for Augusta county a.
bout 2S7 cases. and the Chanoery docket 2S cases.
making together 545 ct the November term, the
first after the amended Constitution OF August 1901
went into operation there were, on the common ID"
docket of the same Court 427 cases. and on the Char
cery docket 1913 cases. making together o20, ana
an increase of rs over the docket ofIo4o
This large and unwiedly docket, as has been conclu
siyey shown grew up under the independent ana IRE
sponsible judiciary, and was 'reiIn o. That ae'