Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-06-30

yourself, a. many good courts and
judges have done. In practice the
courts always, when rendering deci-
sion, let the reason prsccde their de-
cisien, and ground the result
reached upon the reasons gwen. but
the Virginia Constitution is mandatory
that when there Is aftirmancs or re-
versal there shall be reasons, in scriftng,
and that these shall be preserved. The
whole question Of the time OF bling the
reasons turns upon the meaning OF the
word whem. This means, consulting
the best lexicons, sat the time" "at
the time that" This does not mean
the very day decision is rendered, but
il surely does mean that IL must be done
at the term, because it Is certainly well
settled that judges out Of court and
after term is ended cannot do what
they might have lawfully done at
court in term.
II these premises be true, it follows
that when fire judges sit in case
(Cluverius's or any other) three must
agree in the decision reached. This
was done. And at least three must
state in writing the reasons for their
conclusion; but in answer to jus
tice. of Albemarle," it is most re-
spectfully submitted that while there
must be some written reasons, they need
not be the same reasons. Each judge
might arrive at the conclusion by
separate reasons in writing, but it is
necessary that a majority shall give
reasons for the conclusion in writing,
and at the term the decision is render
ed, and not dfterIards. And this
simply because the organic act requires
it. II cannot be done nunc pro tune
II it was a mere statute it could
be treated possibly as directory. The
organic act of State when saying
thing shall be done must be regarded as
mandatory. II three judges of the
Court Of Appeals, before the adjourning
order was entered, filed in writing writ
ten reasons in Cluverius's case, then the
decision, submit, is sustained by the
Constitution. Though three judges did
not agree in the same reasons in writing,
they did file reasons in writing; but if
tuo only of the judges, as was contem-
poraneously stated, filed reasons IN
writing, and and tuo Others did not file
their reasons In writing at the term,
that very able court, ss | think, will
only need to have its attention called
to this constitutional requirement in or
der to reopen the case and make con-
sttutional compliance at the next term
by at least three OF the judges filing
reasons in writing at the term at which
a decision is rendered.
CONSTITUTIONAL.
P. S.--Since the foregoing was writ
ten / have seen the extract from the
minutes Of the Court Of Appeals. That
does not change the question. As
against the rerity of the record else
uhere nothing can be alleged, but the
court itself and its judges can always
say whether their records are correct,
and if not correct they can correct them.
The simple question is, Did three Of the
fire judges during the term at which the
CluYerius case was determined agree in
the reasons given by Judge Fauntleroy?
If not, did either Judges Lacy or Rich
ardson during the term file separate
written opinion? If both questions are
answered in the negative, respectfully
submit that the court has not constitu-
tlonally entered afirmance.
CONSTITUTIONAL.