The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-01-06

We have not deuted the ytkht q the
Supreme Court Of Apt7eals 81 Virginia TO
decide anew, qurstioae which had once
been passed upon BY DIT tribanaI. We
only suggest tbst the question must be
raised anew, II 1t all, IN the judicial de-
mrtment Of thc state Government. The
decisions Of the Supreme Court of Appeals
are the recognized law Of the State, and
must bc respected ~ such by all the Execa.
tive officers and oil the legislative
officers, as well as by all good citizens
Ia their individual capacity. In case
that came before him, Judge wELrFcRp,
sitting ~ q judge, might decide in a new
case differently from what the Supreme
Court OF Appeals had decided In a similar
case; and his decision might 70 before
The Supreme Court Of Appeals for
new decision OF the case by this latter
court. But Judge WETLR0nD, as a cl!i-
zen, has no such right or power. There
fore we claim that as each member OF the
Geueral Assembly is in his character OF
citizen bound by the decisions OF the SUI
preme Court OF Appeals, the question rs TO
the tenure OF Office Of the judges Of this
state could not properly be raised in that
body. Inn word, we hold that whether
the decision Of the Court OF Appeals that
all judges elected In Virginia were elected
for full terms was right or wrong, that de-
cisicn was binding upon The Legislature,
and had TO he reversed by The Court OF APP
peaIs Itself before the Legislature could ac-
quirc the right to question it by the elec-
ton Of judges in contempt OF that de-
cision.
When the Supreme Court OF Appeals In
proper case coming before il in proper
manncr--thst is, from court below, or
raised in that tribunal itscli-shall reverse
its previous decision, then the Legislature
or the Governor will be at liberty to act
accordingly. But not until then. Briefly,
the Legislature violated the law OF the state
as cxpoundesi 10y the only tribunal author
lied to cxpound il, when that body elected
Judges 70 supcrsedc judges whose tenure
Of Office had ben titled by the Supreme
Court Of Appeals. :.
There are, perhaps, a dozen or twenty
county judges in Virginia whose titles to
their Office have been adiudicated by the
Supreme Court OF Appeals. Are they to be
disturbed in their officesi Can the present
tSuprcme Court OF Appeals diyest them Of q
title 70 Office which the last Supreme Court
of Appeals adludgcd to DC goodS And II
so, supposing that their term OF Office were
lengcr than that Of the judges OF the ST.
preme Court OF Appeals, as might be the
case, could Court OF Appeals to be elected
hereafter reverse the decision OF the pre-
sent Court Of Appeals, and, two or four
years hence, again restore to their offices
the county judges whom the last Court OF
Appeais decided to be the lawful incum-
b,uts. whom the present Court OF Appeals
will have decided to bc not the lawful in
cunbents, and whom the rext Court OF
Appeals will decide TO have been the law
full incum.,entsf II not, why not? IL SO.
what is decision OF q Court OF Appeals
worfhI
We have stated our case in the strongest
manner some will say in too strong man.
ner--ior the purpose OF emphasizing the
point. We have dorc 50 because IN both
this country and England the courts are
looked to as the final arbiter in all cases I'M
volving the rights of the people. A dis
tiHgiished Scotehman recently said that
the Supreme Court. OF the United States
was Que thing the possession OF which the
British people might envy the people OF
the United States. And yet Cox in his
General History Of Greece" says 1t is
special characteristic even OF English
polity that the courts OF law are superior
to all other departments Of the Govern
mcnt without exception.
We beg pardon. We had intended not
| to recur to this subject.