Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1861-02-09
For the Standard.

tied bill to alter the Jurisdiction of the courts of
the State and the rules Of pleading for the RELIEF Of
the people" is well calculated to alarm every man
who relies upon written constitutions for protection
Of popular rights. Under pretence of re-adjusting
the established jurisdiction of the courts of law and
re-modeng system of pleading older than the
Revolution, both of which have proved, through
ages of trial, to be admirably adapted to fair im
partial and speedy administration of justice, it is
proposed to break the force of contracts, and post
pone the fulflment of obligations contrary to the
words anG intent of the partes and to the injury Of
him for whom they were made. The only purpose
of court is to redress legal wrongs: 70 it other
wise, is to make it the instrument of incting legal
wrongs To perfect it for its legitimate end, it is
necessary to prescribe its jurisdiction and model its
proceedings. When its jurisdiction is appropriate,
and its pleadings allow fair hearing both of the
complaint and the defence it has attained its high
est perfection as the arbter of right. When thus
fashioned for its great purpose, all unnecessary de-
lay in its action, from any preventable cause what
ever is unjust to Its suitors and encourages the per-
petration of wrongs But when the delay is de-
signed and commanded as by this BILL it is rebuked
by every sense of right; by the spirit of our laws
and constitutions, and by The justice of colonial
complaints of the expressions of England. 1t is re-
buked by sense OF right, if it be just that rights
withheld should be speedily restored. BY the spirit
OF our laws, which for so long time have boasted
not more with pride than with truth, that like the
great king Alfred they have brought justice to every
mans door; laws which have provided special
terms to expedite the trial of cases, and in the
spirit of their makers have exacted of justices
and judges their solemn oath that they "soLE
not delay any man Of common right, By req
SoH OF any letter command from any person in
0wthority, or for any other cause aohatsOerer.
Rebuked by the spirit of the State Constitution;
rebuked by the spirit of the Federal Constitution,
which forbids the State to pass any LAW imparing
the obligation of contracts" and rebuked by CO.
lonial complaint, among the causes for the Revou-
tion that the British king had Constructed the adj
nnistration of justice" lie did 1t by refusing his
assent to laws" you propose to do it by repeating
long-estabshed laws.
1t is rebuked by the rules of honesty inculcated
and executed by every supreme Judiciary that
sat in the State They all, and every judge Of
them for half century, have declared hundred
times that every contrlVance to "hinder and delay
the creditor in the fufmcnt Of his obligation is in
bad faith and a traUd. This is the rule of justice
and honesty in your courts of every grade and you
well know, that it will still continue to bc the rule
there, when the debtor himself makes the contrib
dRce, and so y0u propose tn enact cOntrivanCe for
him, and think to lessen the moral adherence of
the act by giving 1t the S1cte. of your high name
And to protect him from the courts of the law, you
propose to hide him behind screen which the eye
of justice cannot penetrate. Now, gentlemen, if any
of you accused Of secretly putting out of the
way the property of debtor to enable him to shin
der and delay" the payment OF his just debt as he
had agreed to do YOU would feel inSuted. But is
not that the object of this bill and by what code of
morals do you conclude, that legislator you can
make innocent deed, which shocks your integrity
and insults your honor a a man.
Now, gentlemen, look at the title Of your BILL
There iC sandS-and if it becomes law it will stand
forever mark for insult to the name of the State
After passing bill under this title, what will you
think of our claim to be called the Honest old North
Stater What will you think OF your claim to be
called candid lcgislators! There is not one of you
who thinks that either the jurisdiction the plead
ings will be improved. For what purpose then, are
they changed? Now the answer your conscience
is this, merely and purely to Hooo the debtor at his
option to have longer time to pay his debts than
he agreed for; and to compel the creditor against
his will to give that time Then it is clear you have
rot attempted to improve the judiciary but under
the pOTeT to do So you have had single eye to ac-
compSh another Object.
Gentlemen, il You will avow your true purpose
and put your bill in the manly language of free
man, who dareS to speak what he intends, and to
make plain avnwal Of his intent, your cOnStitu-
entS will be content to abide the question whether
You have acted within the scope of the Constitution
or ont of it. You know that the Supreme Court
while it feels itself constrained to pronounce void
all laws in conflict with the Constitution, will never
'lO So so long 4 single lawful intent can be as
signed to your acts, although hundred unlawful
ones more probably the true motives Of tie
act. This rule Of Interpretation is demanded by a
Just regard for your integrity men, and your
sworn duty legislators. You would have lust
cause for offence If any other rule were adopted
This being the rule which your honor from
being questioned in a tribunal to which the legality
of your acts submitted by a Constitution which
You are sworn Ia support-hOw you dare to al
low any act Of yours to approach that tribunal with
a false motive labelled its front? Under the
pretcnCe of amending the administration of the laws
for the ends of Justice. CntltC bill
proclaim that laudable and constitutional object to
the expoundcrS Of the law while your sole pur-
pose is to accomplish act which you know is for
hidden by the highest law of the land under the i'm
penetrable screen which You place between you and
the court. Think for moment, gentlemen, what n
great difference there will be if this bill passes be-
tween the conduct of the court and yourselves -
both sworn to support the same Constitution Will
you feel after such deed, worthy of the compli-
ment which the rule of constitutional nterpreta-
tons bestowed on you? Suppose you pass law,
constitutional in its form and declared intent with
the view to effect purpose forbidden by the Con-
Stitution-do you support the Constitution Rccol-
ect that the court NAV be true its trust and vet
you may be faSe to yours, although the court may
sustain yonr act as constitutional You have the
unquestioned power to prescribe the jurisdiction oil
| courts as well the mode of pleading But
! you have no power ~ impair the obligation OF
contracts" Now it is clearly your duty so to exer-
else the porer as not to disturb the pr0hJition If
you can do So and yet refuse, are you faithful SER
wants? But if under pretence of exercising the
power, you designedly remove the prohibition, have
! you not broken the Constitution? You can pre-
scribe superior court only for the year. if YOU
| please and give to that ali jurisdiction. II due
! regard to the proper administration of justice de-
mands other courts, the law is WELL and does not
impair the obligation of contracts either in word
intent. But when for half century your system Of
enforcing obligations has been fixed and the present
| al. I'LL
have been adjusted to this state of things, you
abrogate your system not to make it better means
! of adjuGicatng rights but to enable persons tc
violate their engagements, and encourage men tc
withhold the rights of their fellow-mcn Let me
ask you, in all courtesy, but with freedom of candor