Richmond enquirer. [volume], February 21, 1828, Image 2

About Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867

Image provided by: Library of Virginia; Richmond, VA

                
V. »ta«mww -r— er-«x*r •-jmiinwn
be trammelled and coni; oiled -nor, sir, should I*'
O't.icli, m this point of vi ‘W, an atom more of im
portance to the opinion, hid it been hold by the:
tna/orii <j, instead of tlie minoi:t v, of the t'ouit.— ■
lloiv cheap the estimation in which I livid sufh i
authority, I shill lierc-dti i have o-cast n to ex- j
plain. 1 rcler to it for Ihe puipo •• ot .hewing ,
that there has been a great ri«» • •rstiy of opinion a- !
tuong the Judges, on the con-ntuii’sia) question in '
volvcd iu this bill. ~llea*ouing then, ot what i,
likely to happen, from what ii * already *oci uried,;
w ft ire wall anted in .isj'iii ■ ig vt a. more than j
probable, that at Icavt eevn out of the nineteen;
Judge* will coincide in opinion with the minoiity j
ol their brethren iu the case referred to. But,,
sir, suppose 11 single in lividnal among them should !
entertain tlicdo scruple*, un i ruju-.e both to exe-1
Cute your law, and to resign hi, seat on the |
Bench—what i* your remedy ? Where your means'
•d enforcing hi* compliance ? The Judge who
administers the law, like the legislator who enacts i
it, i* hound by the solemn sanctions of an oath to J
preserve the t ‘(institution pure and inviolate. You
cannot impeach him, therefore. f,r what ho be
licVes to he an honest conscientious discharge of
Ins duty , and w ithout imp 'uncut you cannot
remove him—for I am sure, Mr. Speaker, no
member of this House will avow himself the ad- i
Vocute ol the Kentuck y dti'diinv, of the right to
legislate Judges ow' *' i.tVi.
Jiut, sir, r may bt -iid lb ile* dissenting Jud
ges will bo bound to waive their constitutional
scruples, and submit to tlm decision of the majoiity
of Uicsr brethren. Itisti.u-, M.. Speaker, that,
in general, the opinion of a Supeiior tfourt binds
an infailor; because tlio Superior Court can re
x eisc tiic* decision ol the ini* i iur—--o, the cpir.iou '
* t the tuaioVily ol a < ourt <iu relation to parties [
iitegaut therein) hinds the minority, for, quoad
hoc, the majority is the court. In these cases,!
inert; is a particular subject matter for tho action '
• l the Courts, and a practical mode in which the '
ptmciple, that the majoiity shall rule, may be
brought to bear upon it. But the case likely to •
glow out ol the bill under consideration, is ouo *
altogether of a ditferent nature. That hill, a* 1
uuucrsiauti u, abolishes the office v* a Judge iu
Chancery, and converts it into a Judge of the '
<iuucial ( ourt. Suppose the Chancellors, when j
<;a!Icil on lo carry its provisions into effect, shall
. “ vve have be u ci.ieted and commissioned in i
1'*V ,na,*ner pie -c.ribed by the Constitution, (o nu
< ..ice vvliicu that instrument recognir.es as sept- '
i ate and distinct from all others.” The tenure of'
this otnre Is gaaiuniced to us, during .mod bel.a
v.our, and vve. have endeavored faithfully, consci- '
entiously, and to the hot < f our -kill and ability,,
to discharge i..e duties which pertain to it. We
aie therefore entitled to retain our appointment,
and vve tlo not choose to accept that of a Judge ol i
the General Court, because vve honestly believe!
the two offices to be iixoTnpxtiblo.” I confess :
mi-, I do not know, nor have I heard «fany means, j
i y Which you c an coerce them to the chance of
character, which you propose to legislate Spon
iliciu. 1 know of no judicial process that could
reach them and 1 satisfied an impeachment
vyo.il.1 be fertile and unavailing. Indeed, sir, 1
am at a loss to conceive how vve should be able,
even to try the experiment of an impeachment.—
*e couhl not impeach them ;«s “Judges iu Chan
* crJ' , bcc;‘use llie Mil t* elf sweeps those Judges
entirely trom our code—for it merges the office of
Miancellor in (hat ol a Judge of the General Court,
lye certainly could not impeach them as “Judges
of t.m Genera! Couit,” b cause the case proposed
m illustration, expressly supposes them to refuse
turn appomtineiits.
But, fir, i leave these point- to be -eltJcd by
gentlemen more conversant with them than my.
» and proceed now to enquire what would ho
the probahfe result of an impeachment, supposing
the tnfficuh.es i have suggested to he removed!
liat, ‘ribH.I,al Wll> convict .. Chancellor, thin ac
. used ? J he Court of Appeal- ? They have said,
iu their inoinonal ot that the common law and
Chancery jurisdictions cannot he blended in the !
faux: person. By the General Court ? Their du
Uaion, lit the case of Kampcr and Hawkins, is M
niimmous against the constitutionality of your
bill, in its present farm. J
Your whole scheme, then, may he defeated, not!
•y ae contumacy of an obstinate and refractory
. udgo, but by the conscientious scruples of an bo- ■
nc,;i man. 1». free governments, Mr. Speaker,
the essential strength of the laws consists in the
respect and veneration iu n hich they are held by
ihose o;, w hon, they operate. This,'sir, is the mo
,ctl energy ol free institutions, which i> infinitely
: upor.or to the physical force by which monarchies
and despotisms are upheld. Whatever, therefore, !
ends to lessen this respect, lo impair this venera- 1
tmn, should he carefully avoided by a wise and
prudent Legislature. And surely, Mr. Speaker
nothing can be better calculated to brine?oUr le^is- I
i 1.0.1 into disrepute, than the passage of a law, j
winch, m all human probability, must either re
mam a dead letter on your statute book—or, pro- !
>.iice t.ie painful and embarrassing result of brin^
.ng tvv o of the co-ordinate department of the gov- ;
einmcnt into ilircct, pci haps, angry collision.0
Bit, -Mr. .speaker, suppose all these difficulties'
ffibe roim yed—take it lor granted your law will ,
1,0 ca,:,,0,, :,lto ‘b>' the Judges unanimously |
agreeing to execute it-ls there yet no reason to !
doubt the policy ol blending the common law and !
• baneery jun .diction ol our Courts ? 1- there no
tiling in the experience ot oilier States that would !
t all upon us to pause, and to deliberate well before '
adopting so important a change in our Judiciary? \
f he gentleman from Amherst ( Mr. Thompson) and
from Brunswick (Mr. Gholson) have called your at- '
' enbon to the mischievous effect* of this blended in- i
n jdiction in North Carolina and Tennessee. And
i.ou well recollect, sir, the earnestness and confi
dence with which the example of Ohio, who ha*
given to her Courts an organualion like that sought
to bo given to ours, was urged upon the House,
|luring fii(i discussion ol thii (j'iosiion !«\st winter
' y a gentleman from the county of Brooke. \Yu
vycre told that there, the experiment of blcudin"
tlio two jurisdictions bad been fairly fr J ai.H
mil in results were entirely satisfactory.
Hut, Mr. Speaker, is it true that this much boasi
im Ju .ictal System of Oiiio is <;uite as popular at J
Amne, x\?.e?tl<’,ncn ire emleavoring to l ender it a- 1
Itroad- Distance, winch always diminishes mate* !
Mai objects, often increases the reputation both of!
inen a.id id tilings; ami 1 cannot but suspect, sir, I
f iat there n some mistake--unijitenlion.il 1 am sure ■
—in the representations that have been made tons i
on this subject. J hold in my hand a letter from a 1
rnost intelligent ami . pectalde citizcti of Oiiio,
Swell known to many ol the members of this!
Dou.c, .did whose name, wherever he is known,'
will avouch the truth of any statement ho may l
make.) which gives a very dillbrt nt view of this
ri.attar, Sc represents the Judicial .Sy.tcjri of 111-State
a* any thing r.ith.-r than as an example liu ourim- I
it.ihon The writer of this Jeltt rsays ‘he h.scon
versed with every Lawyer of ilistinctiou in the
3-i.ice of liu residence (wldch is Ch;ficolhe)-that i
• icy are unanimous in the opinion that [their] Ju- '
dietary Dorganizedtm a wretched til.in —that th> v
dcein it essential that a change should be made
. th it they deprecate particularly that feature '
in [their] .System which • rrludea separate and
amt met t hand nj jurisdiction*—.ir, eve
ry respectable Lawyer whom the writer of this let- !
t w has had an opportunity of con Milting, isdenlor- !
mg the baneful op.-ration of that very feat,woof
fhetr Judiciary, which gentlemen are. laboring !
v. Itn such t arjicvfnt” 1 to i tigrafl upoji ours' j
iiu', sir, it is m,t the Lawyers only v.im enter- !
• iin this Opinion. My correspondent states (|n{
lie has coavorsf d witb some of the Judges rtl.„ on
this subject - that “they are as hostile to’the
y-tern at the Lawyers — and that they think ii
would be scarcely po ril.lo to make a change,
t-.r the vroisc J^m lw hear no more liicrt of the
encouraging example of Ohio. It Dime, sir,
that this account of the practical Operation of the !
judicial system of Ohio cornu* fn.n, the Lawyers
and Judge, of that Stile. Am! to w h .m would you :
apply for correct Jtj.'ort/pitlon as to the merit* or
• aments rf Mlt system, sootier than to thole who '
atv <1»iiy employed in carrying its provision* into
vtfee.it I admit, Mr, that the opinion* of some of
these gentjem n may h« Influenced by considera
ti.,ns oi .- If micro u and p«,*mal convenience—'
f .Mf,!# s; .i,l vvi ’.-n j,,,.,, 1r< „„ exempt from
tl in influence, *m<h, ft. - r.si iou iy to tliem
*u|va*,often <■ ■ I form to theiropin
i >n*. Hut vve can hardly *Uj»posc that thr re i, not
■* single.nd c«/ot//amo6glh«mofftriT,nesKenongh
f-> tree lu i mind from this undue bias, and to offer
up seif i^»crr-<; m ■* on :b a'tar of fru'h '
Vml yet. \jr, my correspondent -ays, all the 1 udg- . ■
- in 1 Lawyers \vi*li whom he Ini- couver-ed ou j I
he sn' i cl, jre unitnini'nts in denouncing their |l
Indicia I System as not only detective, but mis- |l
■Licvous. 11
There r, <•»*• oth< r argument in f.wour of the i i
•dop'i on of tin- scheme, which demand*attention, i
lot on account of any iutriu-ic fore* that it pus-<
>«**, hut because it is no h--s sjo cm us than unsound.
I lit* l-t section of the lit!I declares, that tin Gen- |
ml Court-hall hcrejfter consist of twenty Judg
-, olid the 2J section provides for a dir i-imi of the
^late ih ten Judi.iul Circuits, und a-signs two
lndg - to ea h. And we are gravely told, that
thu olivet ol this arrangement will he that, here
after, your Courts shall ho hold by tifo Judges
instead of pne. L- tlii.s so, Mr. Speaker? On the
contrary, i- not this cb.u-e of ihe lull utterly falla
cious and deceptive? Sir, ** it keeps tin* promise
to the i .n, hut breaks it to the understanding.’*
Let us, lura moment, examine this matter. Lin
der our present system, the Circuits contain se
vi n couutic*, in curb ol which a single Judge
holds only a common-law Court. If you arrange
the State into ten Circuits, and require two Judg
es to sit together, the Circuits will contain, on an
aveiage, ten counties and a half. You are thu-!
increasing the duties of each individual Judge
precisely at the rate ot 50 per cent.; for, I presume,
neither his physical nor mental labour will be
much diminished l y Lis having one ot his brethren
at his elbow an tin Bench, or a- his travelling
companion through the woatLomu pilgrimage of
hi- l ii ci t.
But, sir, tliis i-i not all—you not only increase!
the number ol his Courts one half, hilt you super- *
add to his present duties those of Chancellor. At)
present he dispatches only the onc-JifUrnth pail
of the Cointnon-Jaw liu-dm-v, of the State, and
no portion whatever, of the Chancery business —
and the slow and sluggish pace at which justice
hobbles tin.nigh hi» Courts, i* urged »3 one of the
objections to the present system, by those who are]
persuading you to acccumulatc uj • it him, not only t
the truth, instead of the J'j'tc cn th part ol the Com
moo-la v\, but a tcutlt also of tlie whole Chancery
business ol the Commonwealth. It is obvious then,
• hat this pron.i <• of having two Judges to a Court
cannot be fulfilled—and the inevitable conse
quence will be, a subdivision of each Circuit be
tween the Judges assigned to it. Thus, sir, while
we are tantalizing ourselves with die benefits which
all agree in iisciibing to tins District—wc sliail ex
pui ioneo nothing but the unmixed aud unniitigat- j
ed evils of the Circuit Court System. Besides, i
Mr. Speaker, the advocates ol the hill slrould re- !
collect that the very fact of urging this considera
tion on the House is a distinct admission of the
advantage of having your Courts lulden bv tiro
Judges instead ot one—that is to sav, sir, of the
superiority of dm District, over the Circuit Court
System.
As connected with this Lranch of the ducus
fion, I beg leave to present to the House one other
view ol tiiis subject. That there is something
wrong in our Judiciary—that it does not accom
plish, by the he-t means, the objects of its institu
tion, is admitted on all Lauds; and the grievance
must generally complained of, is the tartly admin
istration of justice. Sir, tiris is a great and a seri
ous e\i!—but it is an evil that will not be cured,
but aggravated, by this favorite nostrum of our po
litical doctors, who seem to me to hate mi-taken
both the character of the disease, and the indica
tion of cure. The mischief they wish to remedy,
though it has it- primaryseat in the inferior Courts,
exerts its baneful influence chiefly in the Court of
Appeals, it is tin re, sir, that the stream of justice
is choukcd and dammed up, hy a perpetual accu
mulation of business, glowing out of wliat 1 be
lieve <it»* lawyers call interlocutory decrees, by
means ol which the same cause may he sent up
some half dozen times to the Appellate Court_
and out of your Circuit Couit System., sir, which,
hy compelling the Judge to be travelling in quest
oi his Courts, when he ought to be reading—de
priving him of perpetual reference to his libraty—
and, above all, by substituting the hurried deci
sion ol one Judge lar the deliberate and well ma
tured opinion ot two, has infinitely lessened tins
confidence of the people in the wisdom of your ju
dicial tiihuuals. The natural consequence is, that
in every osw-e of importance, the party appeals to
the Court ot the last resort. Tor all practical pur
poses, therefore, for such causes, v.e might jir>,t as
vyell have but one Court—nay, air, better- tor par
ties woulvi then be saved the useless expense of
i.tigation iu the Corn la below.
it would seem to me then, Mr. Speaker,—and
being one of the uniniliatid, it is with the most
profound humility th..t J venture even to offer q
nint oti a subject purely profess.' nal—but. it ap
pears to me that the only safe and efficacious Re
medy for the grievance under which we are labor
ing is, in the t.rst place, the adoption of some such
system as that suggested hy the gentleman fi*»n
Amherst, a few days ago, (when-discussing the
proposition for branching the Court of Appeals)_
appointing as master commissioners men wlio are
both lawyers and accountants, who should settle
;.ll accounts brought h fore them, upon general
legal principles to he laid down, in the way of in
strucUon,by the Chancellor, and who shbwld he
paid a fixed salary out ot the treasury like the Judg
es; i kind of sub-chancellor, or master of the toll",
who should perform all the druggery of the o!liee,6i
to which no one man is competeiit--2dly. withhold
ing the right of appeal upon interlocutory decrees
—.«!ly. requiring all the facts of the case to he as
certained, either by the Chancellor, or hy a jury
impannelled for the purpose—and lastly, leaving
nothing t'orthe Court of Appeals but to settle thc
points of law that may have arisen in the progress
of the cause. And in the second place,—to "give
to the inferior courts, both of law and equity, such
an organization as sh.tli restore them to the conli
ueiicu OI me people,, -ana sulndy those on
whom they operate that their lights and interests
are.safe in their hands, is such, sir, the tendency
ot the bill on your table? Lxactly the reverse—It
proposes to make Chancellors oi' men who, per
haps. never in their lives had the management oi a
cause In equity except in the county court—and
Common Caw Judges of tIio>c who probably
loi twenty years have had no occasion to refer to I
a common law authority—besides compelling the!
Chancellors to ambulate through the country in
pursuit of their court*, instead of remaining statio- !
lim y in the midst ol their business and their books,
and delving over the causes they have to decide. [
1 otlie i’erepetetic Philosophy the world owes many
obligations—to in Itinerant Court of Justice, its
debt of gratitude is not lik -ly to be very great.
I come now, Mr. Speaker, to the other and
much important brunch of this question—the con
stitutional authority 0f the Legislature to pass
the'hill in your hand.
V ou cannot have forgotten, sir, the taunt thrown
• it hy an eloquent gentleman from the county of
•Norfolk during the l.v-t winter, against the L«
ged dure oi \ irgim «— that while they would rcs
tii' t the Federal liuveiiiment to a literal and nar
row construction of the constitution of the United
.'.talcs, they were perfect fdiitudinariaris in the ill
tei prclation of their mviipowci., under the eonsti
tiuiun ol V irginia. For one, sir, I cannot admit
that I am obnoxious to this clcuigo—for I hold it to
be a fundamental principle ol republicanism (whe
llicr in inh rpicling the State or Federal consti
tution) Ilia; to doubt whether any particular now
er bas hern granted, is, to decide at once against
,i« err,. ;," It V M the Strict ob ' tvancc ol ti.i«
golden political maxim, that in 1801, arrested our
headlong c'i.ii-i: tov, uds ilie gulf of consolidation,
perhaps J si: ild say, «ir, towards the vortex of
monart by at. 1 (nought us hack to the true prin
ciples of (ho c.iiutitulion—and it is the utter disre
gard ol it in modern tlays, that has set us adrillup.
on the wi iesaa of speculative conjecture, with9ut
chart or comp is to du'cctour course. I am there
ic, iw sen hie of the import and value of
i ii i rule of interpretation not lox^as ready to ob
serve i: mjseif, <is to in i«t upon its observance bv
other-'. *
It is true, sir, them is an ,i,«0n'.ial difference
between Mic constitution of the United State* and
tii m o> V irgini i. The one ait a charter of certain J
specified powers, t\,r other, a grant of all Jegi dative
authority, urn certain lin.Uatunts & restrictions.
f or,gross ran do nothing except what they are
directly, or judirecfly authorized to do—we can]
do almost any filing that is not prohibite d. J}„| |
although there is this marked diflcrcnco in the I
mode hy which power is delegated and rostn ted
hy the** two instrument*, the role of interprets*!
Honof which I have spoken! is equally applicable |
to each—fir it is founded upon a principle alike [
applicable to evert/ form of republican govern-!
m at., that it is p- r for th" agents of the P'jor lc (o
L
;o back to the original source of alt political |<owcr,
or au otibirgenient of tlieir authority, if such cu
argument he found necessary, (Iran to weaken oi
>icik through the hariicrs thrown around the;
ight* ot the people, hy cxem-mg powers nevei
ntended to b- conferred. Where doubts exist,
he people are the only competent authority to ex-1
>laio them.
Appl\ mg this rtil- limn, Mr. nkcr, to the bill j
,>%t'ir* the House, ! call upon every g-nll >m.m '
whose mind is not entirely free from doubt, as to
the constitutionality of this nu.isure, and who
acknowledges the authority of tins rule, to act in I
obedience to it, hy rccot ing his vote against the !
bill. I'or mynell, sir, i not only doubt our au
thority to p.i-s it, but I aiu smi-lied that we are
directly am: clc.rly inhibited by the Constitution,
from passing it.
in looking into the Con-jljttition, we find that the j
mo-t marked characteristic by which it* di-tin-'
guished, i- the principle of checks und balances,
that pervades the whole ni.-trumrnt. I have ever
admired tlib feature of our Constitution, because
ol the beauty, order, and symmetry it imparts to
tin* whole structure—but! sir* I confess I have
never learnt duly to appreciatg its value until the
present moment. 1 look to it as the only means
oi avi'ig us from the ditcful Mischiefs w ith which
I conscientiously believe this measure to be
fraught.
i be illustii.ius it on wim framed the
Constitution, taught 1 y hi lory, the danger of ai -
cumulating too much power, in the same ^ands,
and aware ol tlic prm ness of man, not only to a
huse the authority with w hi. h he i- intrusted, hut
ever to grasp !>t more— laid the foundation of the
government they werc( about to l icet, upon tire
1 roail iepiiblican principle that political power
should he distributed among vui-uis agents, who
should act as checks and restraints upon each
other. Thus, sir, we find them not only establishing
thiee great co-ordinate depurtinciitsof governuient
—the Legislative, Executive and Judicial—bui»ub
di; iding each of these again, into smaller allotments
ot power. Lven the L.vecutive authority—under
almost every other Ibrin of Government on earth,’
centreing, lor llie Most part, on a single individual
—ts divided between the Governor and eight
( ouncillors, without whose assent, he oanuot ex
es <i*e a solitary power, even -the most insignifi
cant. And this House, too, sir, although tire im
mediate jepresentativesof the people—from among
whom they are annually chosen, and to whom
they -nnu dly return, to give an account ol" thei;*
stewardship—is denied full and complete Legisla
tive powers, and is checked, and curbed, bV a co
ordinate branch of the Legislature, without wha.»
sanction, no Act of ours is valid.
- ‘‘it we believe then, that the jealous and watch
ful vigilance that so carefully guarded the rights
at. i liberties of the people from encroachment!* by
an Executive of the most limited and niggard
l ow. rs, and by a House or Delegates, emanating
immediately from the people themselves, would
nave been lulled to sleep in arranging the uuthor
y ®.r l,'e Judiciary—the least responsible to. ao.i
the larthest remove from, the people, of all the
departments of the government? If our fore
t ithers remembered that there were such usur
pers and despots in history, as Caesar and Crom
well, they did not forget Hint human nature had
been disgraced by the production of such vi'.- i,iL
creants as Scroggs hnd as Jcfleries. Sir, if this
salutary principle of a subdivision of power could
have lieeu any where aafely dispensed with in the
Constitution, surely it would have been in relation
to the popular branch of the legislature, whose
turn of uj*ice is shortest, and whose accountabiU
ty is the strictest—and not in relation to the Ju
diciary, who are not even elected by the people,
w,umkj tenureaf office is durimr e-ood boha.
vionr—in other wortfc, sir, fur Vfc. ° n
• Nf?Vir> ify°11 ca,» u"5,c two of the Courts de
signated by the Constitution, and among which
tlm: Constitution intended to distribute the Judi
tl,'l Authority, to be exercised in separate and dis
tinct parcels, you may bi-md aft the Courts. ol' the
• Oiiinminveuiib in one. \nd what then becomes
inc stnnable piincipleof checks and balan
' ' ' o3"0 utterly annihilated. Keasoninrr
I* ni" analogy there lore, we arc brought to the in
evitable conclusion, that the framers of the Con
.-.11111100 no more intended to make the Judicial
cilice one andtndwioiblc, than to concentre all
Kxecutive Authority in the Governor, and all Le
gislative power :n the House of Delegates. And
wc shall see hereafter, that this inference is fuily
home out hy the plain and obvious meaning of the
I Constitution itsclt. hut before proceedings com
ment on those parts of tho Constitution that have
I un lmn-' diate bcaifng on tin; question wc are dis
i CUS<,»S> ‘ leave to notice;, class of arguments
riuicli relied on by the advocates of this bill—tl.o-e
J mean, sir, founded upon the authoiity of prece
I lie friends of the measure seem to attach
great importance to the Act of ’79, which consu
med the judges of the High Court of Chancery,
General Court and Court of Admiralty, judges of
tho Court of Appeals. J hey urge too, upon the
a..L!ition of the House, the iaw establishing a
Court for the District 0f West Augusta, and that
appointing t.ic .Sp.Ti.d Court of Appeals. They
quote these sever ,| Acts in a tone of triumph, as
.molding a coti-mporuneous exposition of the t.’on
stum.on altogether iu favor of the construction
u.iuh they themselves put upon that instrument.
L .r ing learnt, Mr. Speaker, from what i deem
the highest authority in j>>liU«s (the immortal
Jelierson) th,.‘ “ one example in favor of power
is ci more latency than an hundred against it,”
1 have long looked with distrust upon all ai"u
im-nts derived trorn precedent; and I confess, sir,
that my respect for this kind of authority is infi
nitely lessened, by finding some of tho worst
measures of a had administration attempted to he
su,tamed, l>y referring to example, to he met
Mr xr-V ‘e Pu™ "PuWican days of Jeff.-rson and
ot Madison, It euch „ttme8 as these can be quot
ed as authority torn free and btitudinous interpre
tation of the Constitution of the United Stater/
lor w.iat daring and umvarnintable stretch of
power may not a precedent he found"
In the conductor political affairs, the acts and
opinions of those who havo gone betore us, are
in rolntion to questions of expediency, entitled to
tho fullest and most respectful consideration -in
inch rases sir, they arc “ Philosophy (caching Ly
example; and, to disregard tho lessons (heyincul
e.dc, would ho to shut our eyes against tho lights
ol experience. Put, in questions like that wo are
now discussing, I mud he excused for utterly de
nying the binding authority of precedent, whether
1 resented in the lorn, of a judicial decision, or of
•m Act of an antecedent Legislature. We are
called on to decide a grave question of conrtitu
tutional power—a question u hieh malms a <li
rect appeal to the con-cicnoo of every member of
Ins House, aim which each must decide far him
FL"> “pnnHng lo the best lights in, can obtain
and according to tho honest suggestion* of hi
judgment. In a matt, r of this sort, sir, I cannot
j1’2 . f* convictions ot any man’s conscience as
the gui le of my own. However I may respect
and venerate the virtue and the wisdom of those
who have picccded us, I cannot consent to surren
der my conscience to their keeping.
Hut, sir, if gentlemen will persL-t *•» .npeaij,,,.
to precedent us authority, we it. st be content to
meet tbom on their own ground,,, and “to fivht
inem With their own weapons” As a fair offset
agatmit the law of ’70, I would offer the law ol
77, (two yeers pflor iu date, nnd passed within
one year after the adoption of the Constitution.)
which established a High Court of Chancery, and
transferred lo ,1 tlm whole Chance,y Jurisdiction
heretofore exercised by tlm General Court. Tims’
Mr, wo find the first Judicial Act passed under
t 'c C'nis/th'h w.separating the Common Law
and Chancery Courts, (which, under the Colo
mat (iorernment, had been united in one.) and
organizing them as sqnireite and distinct tribu
nals.
/r' r, , J0n to *he o'her two cnscuthaf lnvc been
fit' ll, it is true Mr. Speaker, that although the
Lr>Xi-VJ 1,1 ,1" ir celebrated remonstrance
or I7KS, did declare the law of 'H7 (ap^in'ing I
■e judge* of the Court, to which they brion"fl*
Vf ,1,c Court,,; to be tin eon-1
uittrfionai; this derision was not founded upon i
denial of the light of the legislature, to const/-!
tute the ( ourt o» Appeals of die judges of all the 1
other Court•< of the Commonw/alth—for they ,ro,fJ
<» admit this right—-but upon the ground, that
the law imposed now- and addition..! duties on the i
ludgos, without providing a proportionate increase 1
of Mr- S,.r..k,. it is equally t, n£
»nd I would particularly invite the attention o»1
ihoio gentlemen, who rely «o confidently on <tv- !
<l0r‘t'J, * the Jr'f-'h... tv*Cwrf. con .. S t ef
rn judges, at the head ol whom stood I'cnJtctoi: i<
*!!'1 Bl ythe, the iiiusti hui fathers of tho Law in i
\ ii giuia, and tin- most efficient agents in tin- for-li
m.i'ioii ol 111o ( ou>titution they were about to in
terpret, unanimously derided that the Legislatui c
lia.l no authority to “ oh-ml thr duties ofjhc
judges ol the ticon at Com t. Court of Chan
cery, and Court <f . Jdiniralty." Here, then, i
the un.mimou- , ccuiun,<)( one ot the limit nu- 1
morons, and, pei Imps, the ablest jiuiici.il trihim.ti,
that ever assembled in \ iiginia. declaring the hill:
in your hand to bo unconstitutional, lithe au-i
llioiilyol gn at names is to bo decisive of ihi •
mutter, I challenge the advocates of tho hill to
pioduce un equally formidable array on their side
ol the question, t an g, uthnnen, ’lion, seriously
(.alter themselves vthli the ho]>e ol carryitigtheir
scheme into effect, \vhen its execution detrends
upon tiro improbable fact, of every one of the
nineteen jfidgos ol the • hanecry and General
Tourts dissenting from this deliberate opinion of
iheir illustrious predecessors? Whit probability
there is of their obtaining this perfect unanimity
among the judges, I have already endeavored to
shew, in my remarks upon the case of lkanipcr
Hawkins. 1
lint, Mr. Speaker. a« the friends and opponents
ot this measure may find some difficulty in ad
justing the balance in this account of authority,
let us go to the fountain hen I—let us go to the
text itsii!, ami not to the contradictory commcnta
ii'j> upon it. 1 or inysclf, -it. 1 want no belter co !
tcniporancous ex;>o.ition of the Constitution_if 1 i
mas so speak—than the Constitution itself.
The first constitutional objection that presents it
sell to the Will in your hand relates to tho means
by vvlueh fi/o/ic its provisions can he carried into j
eliect. 'f^ese means, sir, consist in tho appoint
ment, by law, of the present Judges of the General j
t a** (. Imnceiiore, and the Chancellors as Com- .
moil La w Judges, while tho 11th section of tlic i
constitution piovides, that the Juih'-s kIioII he an-!
(minted by ballot. The verb to ballot, according j
to the best lexicographic authority, clcailv ini-1
plies h,c right vj choice— the power of selecting. I
-xow, sir, have we the right of choice in the case
oetore t* On the contrary, ore we not compelled
U> choose, (such is the solecism of terms in which
tins measure involves us) the present incumbents—
or, by refusing to do so, to violate tlie constitution, i
iij legislating judges out ot office? Perhaps, Sir
gentlemen ,„ay contend that they are not legidat
ing the judge out of office, inasmuch as they leave
in 4 sal ary and commission untouched, and onlu dc
pnve lam of the duties of his office. Tltat is to
say, sir,they will seize upon the substance, &. insist
they commit no violence, because, forsooth, they
h ave the shadow. The duties pertaining to an
uMxcc :‘rc "‘Uch more a part of the office than the
commi w n hy which it is held—nay, sir, they arc
the very essence of the office—the thing itself—
I t>ou cannot deprive the Judge of the commis
sioi), wwh is merely the evidence of his authority
to discharge the duties of a judgeship, much less
: can you deprive him of the judgeship itself.
It may Lc said, Mr. Speaker, that, as the trinr
dons of the Judge consist wholly iu expounding
■ V,,d .a‘1"‘mlst,orinS ‘he Iws of the land, until the
legislature has given him laws to administer, he
■ has nothing to do—the constitution not having pre
1 Jcr»bcd his duties—ami further, that as the J.e>ns
lature has the power to repeal eny one law, so
j hav e tltey the right iu repeal all the laws of the
I Common wealth, and thus take from tl,- Jud~e the
j whole subject matter on which his authority can
; ho made to bear. 1 admit, sir, that the right to cm
act implies be right to repeal, and that you have
! T‘!P"- ,llc legislative sponge to
I *} “ ; 10suspend the functions,
| not only of tho Judges, but of every other officer
I iccogniscd hy the constitution. Hut, Sir, the
j nght to enact laws in conformity with the constitu
i Uou’do.C3 not c:*.rry with it the right to enact such
as arc in opposition to that instrument—nor docs
the pow er to suspend the duties of any paiticular
officer, (hy repealing the laws, the execution of
which constitutes Id* duties) imply the i fob* to
require the duties of that officer to he performed
Sr«T;-0t,h?r- Tfl? ,no.iDent >’°11 co,,,e tore-cn
■ t the Just law, under the constitution, you must
l >ok to that instrument as y our guide, and the
: question at once recurs—to which department of
j tho government, executive, or judicial, and to
j wnich a ranch ot t!ic.;o docs the ex
ccution oltl.ii law properly pertain? Does this
law provide for the administration of justice nc
j cording to the principles of Kquitv? Then its cx
jccuunn belongs to the ‘ Judges' in Chancery’—
1 ocbil involve Common Law principles? Then it
fails withm (he province of (ho * Judges of the
j General Court.’ °
j J. I am right then, Mr. Speaker, in the inter
im h?”3!/ haV,° sxvc“ to ,lle ,erm “to appoint by
hallot. the only means by which this scheme
can be earned into effect, is, hy the Legislature
declining to perform a duty positively enjoined up
on them hy the Constitution—namely, the duty of
exernsuig the'r ducretion iu the appointment of
uc.ges. And surely it can require no argument
| to prove, that to do an act m any other mode than
that pi escribed by (lie Constitution, is no less a vi
| olalioii oi its spirit, than to do that which it direct
; ly piolnbits. If tiffs be not so, sir, then have we
| the right to appoint Judges by ayes and r.ocs-l,v
joint rosolution-or by law, as the bill in your
hand proposes! it is, therefore, no answer to the
argument 1 have been urging, to s;fy, that the
same m .jenty ti ,! passes the bill, would, if « ,e
«nt ?„a| ,a UVVi:l.I! necessary’, re-appoint the pre
sent Judges—for, they must appoint these men not
under the influence oi that motive which the Con
stitution says shall govern us in such appointments
—not because they prefer them to all others—hut
because their re-appointment is absolutely neces
sary for carrying their scheme into effect. This
majority then, !s volunKirihj putting themselves
in an attitude in which it is i/npoyiLde they can
perform a duty enjoined upon them hy the Coosti
tion n> ,U t >C mantler Prescr^ed by the Constitu
Hut, Mr. Speaker, if there he any ambiguity in
the phraseology ol tho 11th sect.#, pf the Const!
tmioii, that ambiguity js dearly explained hy the
iu.11mi '!•' of xi,e same iiietrument.
I ho IGth section ordains, that the Governor and
a.l others-— including, ot course, tho “Judges in
Chancery —offending against the Slate, shall be
impeached hy the Hou e of Delegates, and tried
by the Gen. Court. Thus sir, wf hav’e a trihunal
provided for the trial of all official offenders, except
the Judges of the General Court—and what provi
sion does Uio Constitution make for their malfoa
sance in office? it declares, in the 17th section, j
that if all, or any of the Judges of the General
Court <ua>l, mi good grounds, (to be judged of b# ;
the House of Delegates,) be accused of any oft)* !
crimes or offences before mentioned, such House j
ot Delegates may, in like manner, impeach the
Jm.ge or Judges so accused, to be prosecuted in
'fons to ,d/‘pi,c: 'r-;: r,w hiu* »«
. igns to tho General ( our* and to the Court of Ap
peals, respectively, certain specific Judicial func
tions, which each wto discharge, and which, of i
rrnr b,s th« other. Now, i
sir, it theso Iwo clauses of the Constitution, taken '
m conn . ion with the I It!,, (providing for the an- j
pointmeui of, and enumerating Judges in, four sc
v ci al Courts.) be not a clear and unequivocal rcco"--1
tutton of separate, didiiict, and independent Irifru- I
mils, l challenge gentlemen to shew that the ofli- '
ces of Governor and Councillor of State, are any i
where recognized by the Constitution, as distinct *
oid incompatible. A careful examination of this I
i.isti uniciit mscloscs a most remarkable coincidence I
... proviaiw,' re»unx to the Kxecntire and Ju
dicial departments ol the government. 7'lic Oil.
section declares that “a Governor or Chief Mam,,
tr.ito shall he chosen annually, by joint ballot nf
both Houses” the 11.h dJr£t*Va?'»aPTy
Council, or Council of State, consisting of eiglrt
members, shall be chosen by joint ballot of both
l ies mh.t £ T .y, ~MU' ,4,h action pro
vhies hat th. two Houses of Asembly shall, by
joint I,allot, appoint Judges of the Hopremc Court
ol Appeals, and General Court, Judges in Chance
ry Judges of Admiralty, &c ” |K"h?XJ
(tanspo-ition of words in these different .1
« «■«. Co"»'l",U„„. J” 'y.
p0'"' "I1 "Won-nr* i„ ,h,.
sense and meaning of the terms used. If thr- 14th
trwnZ’ !',*%. ** lh« UBIillcman
OTrn?. m V. Uld (y,r- /,«vv,or>) contends, only ;
loprmi.,0 the mean* and the m„,re of clcc,i:,u !
Judges and conn.ms r;0 designation of didinrt 1
hidjerthm 0r .^rr,, neither do the Ptl. and l hi •
sechons contain any such designation of th. ..slirc i
;,n,i o' tauncUlor. Hut it may be
' ?werTn' ^anl,np reprieve*, ami of
^ ■ >f! Cm era l specifictJiv,
unterred on tin Governor, is u recognition of ln
iflioo under the Constitution. I admit it, sir—ami
mly contend, that the specific provisions of the. \
1(><7i «rid nth sections qf the Constitution a
ioutit to arlike recognition of the office of a
fudge qf the (fenoral Court, unit the ojficc of a
fudge o/ the Couit of Appeals. My argument,
hen, i»—that you have cither tho power to blond
he two hr inches nt tho Kxocutivo department ol 1
die government, by electing one of tho Councillors
» Governor (who, acting in l oth capacities, will
(til! make the eighth Councillor)—or, you cannot
unite two judgeships in otic. Mr. Speaker, I quiot
litis topic, le->t my feeble efforts U> do ju stice to it
should mar the force and beauty' of the t '•’or, com
prehen-ive and logical argument of iny triendfrom :
Mecklenburg, (Mr. Goode,) whose reasoning on
this brunch of the question, is not only unanswered,
hut unanswerable.
Ihit, sir, this bill is beset by another constituti
onal difficulty, 'i'ho constitution declares expli
citly that** Judge - in Chancery” shall be tried by
the General Court—and yet, sir, in the tooth, not
only of the spit it, but of the very letter of the
constitution, you are about to pass a law which
must require the Chancellors to be tried cither by
11 Court composed if themselves—against which
you have seen, the constitution car fully provides
—or, by the Court of Appeals, which the constitu
tion say s shall not try them. Gentlemen are wel
come to either hoiu ol tho dilemma—and I pre
sume they will hardly uttempt to escape from it
by saying that the judge will bo triable I»v the
General Court for offences committed as Chancel
lor, and by* the Court ol Appeals tor misconduct
as a judge at common law—for this would bn sur
rendering the whole question*—it would be giving
up tbe unity and indivisibility of the judicial of
liee, the basis, the very foundation on which all
their arguments rest.
it the judicial office be a unity, tit on may you
di-ti ibute the judicial functions as you please u
mongthc Judges, orrequtre each, interchangea
bly, to perform the duties of the rest. Uut if the
constitution did not intend to concentrate tho
whole judicial authority in any single individual,
or any tore set of individuals, but to distribute it
among various agents, unconnected and indepen
dent of each other, we arc bound to obey its in
junctions, and to keep separate and distinct those
offices which it has «oid shall not be blended.—
That such is the obvious meaning and intention
of tho constitution I think 1 have shewn, not only ;
by arguments drawn from the analogy of other
parts of the same, instrument, but by the explicit
provisions contained in the ICth and 17th sections,
imposing certain specific, duties on two of the!
courts, which can be performed by no other:—as !
clear an intimation, it would seem to me, as Ian- '
gunge can afford of the individuality of tifesc
The illustrious sage* who framed the constitu
tion us the most obvious and effectual means of
preserving the stream of justice pure and unsullied,
provided that tho<c who administered the laws of
the landshould beheld amenable,not lo themselves,
hut to a separate ami independent tribunal; and
they sought a safeguard for tho rights of the people,
not in a multiplication of courts constituted of the
same individuals, but in the establishment ol'dis
I tiuct tribunals, composed of ttijferent men, who
should act as checks upon each other.
Honestly and thoroughly convinced, Mr. Spea
ker, that the bill in your hand is both impolitic
and unconstitutional 1 am constrained to enter
my humble, but solemn protest against its passage.
Before t..king my seat 1 beg leave lo notice an
argument—jh:i haps I should call it an uppcul—
that has been introduced into this discussion with
great and marked emphasis. We have been told,
f ir, in a tone of triumph that the bill before the
House is * the People’s Bill.’ In a sincere and
unaffected deference for the will of the people,
when 1 airly ascertained, I yield to no member on
this floor, to no man in this community:—it was
one of the earliest political principles that I imbib
ed in iny youth, and it has grown with my growth
and strengthened with my strength—and if I had
sufficient evidence to satisfy ine that the inajoiily
of the people of Albemarle were desirous of the
passage ot the lull wo are discussing, 1 would—
not vote for the bill, sir, for enlertaining_ the opiui
ons I do on the constitutional question, 1 should
hold myself perjured were 1 to do so—but I would,
al the moment such evidence was furnished, va
cate my scat on this floor, and afford my constitu
ents an opportunity of selecting a 'representative
v. hose opinions were in accordance with their
own. 'I his, sir, is the most that the constituent
has a light to require of tho representative—and it
is the trust Unit the representaffvo.ii bound to do
whfcu he has the inisibrtune to find himself at is
sue, on a constitutional question, with those who
have made him the guardian of their rlgnts and
tlieir interests.
But, Mr. Speaker, 1 cannot discover the pre
eminent claims of this Bitl to the popular coguo
I men which gentlemen are so fond of bestowing iim
I on it. Regarding it us an axiom, that, as the People
| are the source, of all power, the only legitimate ob
ject of all legislation is the good of the People, I
j had supposed that every law wc passed, might,
with equally strict propriety, be called -the Peo
ple’s law.’
But,Sir, where is the evi.icnccof tho great unx
I iety of the people for the passage of this Bill? I
have heard ot no public meetings on the subject
i -1 see t*0 petitions crowding your table in its fa
vour; and so tar as my own observations extends, I i
aver that among the people whom 1 in part repre- j
scut, 1 have no recollection of ever having heard
the subject mentioned,.save bv lawyers, except
upon one occasion, when a respectable freeholder ;
I —luo oiily being present—expressed some regret
I at the failure of the Bill during the last session,
i n’I the only argument that I recollect he urged i
I in its tavour, was the inconvenience of dragging
I suitors from every corner of the district, before
! tho master commissioner at the scat ot the Chan
cery Court, lor a settlement of their accounts. We !
may rest assured, Sir, that whenever the People !
become anxious for the adoptionof this or any oth- ]
er measure, tlrjy will speak their wishes, not in j
low and murmured whispers, but in a voice that’
shall resound throughout the land, and that will
carry obedience wherever it is heard, in the ah- j
seiit.e of all indication ol the will of my constituents '
on the question before the House, 1 shall pursue
that course in relation to it which my judgment and
my conscience approve.
I have done, Sir. I thank the House for their
kind and patient indulgence, and trust they will do
me the justice to believe, that I have entered Into i
this discussion, not from the silly vanity ofstlppos- j
ing that any argument i was capable ol urging was j
lively to make a single convert to my opinions, but!
for the huruble purpose of explaining, and as far as
I can, ol justifying the vole I feci it my duty to
give.
<£ongircgg(onal.
IN SENATE.
Thursday, Feb. 14.
The Senate icsumed in Committee of the
Whole, the bill making an appropriation for the
erection of a breakwater, near the mouth of Dela
ware b«y. ,
Mr. Marks said, that as if was a bill of some im
porlanrc, and tho Senate was not as full as he
would wish, he would move that if he laid on the I
table, with an understanding thatit would be taken
up on Monday next.
The Senate resumed, as the unfinished business
(he consideration of the report of the Committee !
appointed to revise the rules of the Senate. The
question being on the amendment of Mr. Foote_
It was discussed by Mean. Johnston, of Lou.
Tyler, Van Huron, Dickerson, Macon, Chambers,
Foote, and \\ hite. W hen tho question was taken
on the first hraucli of the amendment, as relates
to vesting the Vico President with the powerof
railing to order, and decided in the affirmative,
yeas <M,nays 15. 'I he question was then taken
on the «ccond branch of the amendment which
relates to tho appeal to the Senate, and decided
in tho affirmative, yeas |.‘l, nays 2
Tlm Senate then adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
.tpjn(j i iationa for the Navy.
'I he Hou c resumed the consideration of tho ap
propriations for 112*, and ordered the biil to be cn
gioved and read a third time. firm. ton.
Mr. Mallary gave notice, that after the appro
priation bills were gone through, he should ask
that tfic House would go into committee of the
whole ort the state of the Union, on the bill re
ported ly him f.om ■ he omitftlc j of manuf.ic
INTERNAL IMi'n *\EMENT.
Mr. 11 auiillon believed (bare wore more sur’.v\*
low iii the To|iographical bureau than could he
carried into cllect in half a century, or, totpiuk
vitliin hound* for twenty-live year*. Under thu
■arcntal patronage ot the gentleman from Virgin
a, (Mr. Mercer,) who, lie believed, was in favor
jf every canal and every road iu the country, ]no
ret* had accumulated which could not be com
pleted within that time, lie did not like this
mode of employing lli6 Topographical Engineer..
Mr. Mercor asserted the power of the (’resided:,
as commtu)der-in-chtof, to employ the Engineer.
inwhat service he pleased. This service was one
id great hardship. The w hole expense of these
surveys was not <al,000,000. As hi the Ohio un i
Chesapeake Canal, concerning which the public
had so long been astounded with calculations of its
expense, ail that was asked for it was one million
>»t dollars. The settled policy of the country was
not to he changed with every temporary sectional
change of sentiment.
Mr. Whipple replied to Mr. Hamilton.
Mr. S. Wood, of N. Y. supported tho amend
ment. We ought to survey our sea coast, and tin
present system ought to ho arrested- Internal
Improvement pertained to states.
Mr. Kremer saw no goad from the sum v*._
There were many ways of spending a -urplu*.
On motion of -Mr. Haynes, tl.e House adjourned.
l'aUJAY, February lo.
jn; senate.
I he following written Massage was y*>»lprd.i',
received from the President of the U. Stales:
To the Senate of the United States:
Washington, 1 Ith Feb. 182s.
In compliance with a resolution ofthc Sen.* .-,
of the 11 th instant, requesting copies of the in’
struct -ns to Andrew Lllicott, Commissioner fir
running the line between tbe United Stales and
Spain, and of any Journal or Report front the Se
cretary r.t State, with the documents requested,
so far as they are found on the tiles of the Depart
inent. . 1
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
On motion of Mr. Cobb, it was ordered lo bo ic
ferred to tbe Committee on Judiciary, and to be
printed.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Mr. Cambreleng, from the Committee on Com
ttierce, to which had been referred the bill
110,11 tbv Senate, in udHitiuu to an act concernin'*
Discriminating Duties of Tonnage and Impost, re
ported the same without amendment. Thu bill was
then committed.
AMLNDMEN I* TO CONSTITUTION OF THE
U. STATES.
Mr. Whipple submitted the following; which
was read, and submitted to the Commftiee of the
33 hole House oti the state of the Union :
Resolved, That the Constitution of the U. States
ought to lie so amended as that theElectors of Pres
idctit &. Vice President in each State in this Union
snail *>o elected by g«."iiet*;il ticket,8c nut otherwise.
Mr. Floyd of Virginia submitted the following
resolution: > 0
Resolved, That the Committee to whom was
referred the rules and orders of this House, bu
instructed to inquire into the expediency of pro
viding some means of making the Stenographers
responsible for the accuracy of their reports.
[This motion gave rise to a brief debate, or can
vet sation, of which we regret the necessity, im
posed by the press of other mutter, of deferriii"
a report to our next.]
The conversation ended by the resolution bcin -
ordered to He upon the table.
Mr. I uckcr of S. C. moved the following reso
lutions; which were read, and committed to the
Committee of the 33'hcle on the State of the f
uion, viz:
1. Resolved, That the Constitution of tlio I
States ought to be so amended as to invest the Le
gislatures of the respective States with full power
to pi escribe, by law, the mode of giving as many
electoral votes for President and Vice President
o! the U. S., as such State may be entitled tos:r.d
Senators and Representatives to Congress.
2. Resolved, 'l hat, whenever it may happen
that there is no election on the first ballot, for
* rusiileot or \ ice President, the President of th«*
>>• unto shall publish Hu* facts in relation thereto,
and each Stale shall give 011c vote to one of the
two candidate having the greatest number of votes
tor 1 resident or 3 ice President (as the rase may
be) 1,1 such manner as the Legislature then rod
*‘*■’3 > ”3’ law, direct.; and should it so happen t at
there he no election on the second ballot, the facts
shall, in like manner, be published, and each Slit.*,
m hkc manner, give oiic vote, until an election bo
made.
3. Rrsoived, That a Committee he.appointed to
draw up an amendment of the Constitution, in
conformity with the foregoing resolution .
Mo.vpay, Feb. 13.
IN SENATE.
JUDICIAL PROCESS.
On motion of Mr. Rowan, the hill to establish
process in the Slates admitted into the Union since
tiie year 1789, was taken up.
Mr. Parris moved the n consideration of the
vote taken on Friday oh tiie amendment ofE-nul
Mr. Rowan; tvbich motion was rejectee).
’! then prefaced a motion to recommit
t.ijJ, with some remarks explanatory of his mo
tives.
< hi this motion consult raLIc discussion took place,
m which Messrs. Sanford. Kane, Rowan, Wcb
f‘|er, Pazcwelf) and Jolinston of Louisiana, ex
pressed themselves.
Mr. Pari isthen withdrew his motion to rceom
J?1 ’ , ‘*^r- Johnston|of Lou., ha\ing questioned
the < hair as to the propriety of moving to recon
sider the vote of Friday, on Mr. Rowan’s amend
ment. the President observed that it would lie in
order to move to reconsider the vote on rccon'.id
eration.
Mr. Smith of Md., moved to reconsider the voto
on the motion to reconsider.
This motion Was warmly opposed by Messrs.
Rowan and Tazewell.
Mr. Webster said, that some extraordinary pro
position had been laid down in the argument that
had just been pronounced; but the lateness of th •
hour induced him to move an adjournment: When,
1 fie Senate adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Air. McDulhe, from the Committee of Ways fit
Means, made a report, accompanied by *• A bill
,p cJlJJ*"ze i,nd reduced the duties on imported
I lie Speaker!,lid beforo flic House the following
letter from the Secretary of W ar; which was rcu.?,
and laid on the (aide.
department or War,)
T , ,. Feb- M, 1828. $
M r : In obedience fo a resolution of the H.of
K. of the 8th inst. 1 have the honor of submitting,
herew ith, copies of nil the letter* ami corre«pond
enco between t'.io Sccretaryof War ami Gen. A.
Jackson, fiom the roinmcncemcnt of the Creek
w ar, until the 1st of March, 1815, in which ref, -
rencr- is made to the subject of the draft, service
and discharge, of the several corps of tiic Tennes
see militia.
The corespondenre transmitted i* embrace 1
in two packages : the first containing the lette rs
from the Secretary of IVar to General Jackson, and
number* d from 1 to i»; the second, fiom General
Jackson to the Secretary of War, and numbered
fiom 6 to 13. The duty of arranging the papers
prepared in obedience calls from Congress has
been long performed by an inferior Clerk in tho
Department, and, by a reference to former answer
to calls of a similar kind, it will he found this moda
of arrangement has been pursued.
1 hare the honor to be, your obedient servant,
_, , JAMES BARBOUR.
T,C ;7>,77,™r* f. the n°mr "f nwresentattw.
Military appropriation Bill
On motion of Mr. McDuffie, the orders of the
day were posponod, and the House went into Com
mittce of the Whole on the State of the Union,
Mr. I aj’ior of N. Y. in the chair.
The consideration of the bill making appropria
tions for the military sen ice,was resumed, and the.
question being on the amendment moved by Mr
fngliam.whicli meant fo confine the appiopriation of
g 1,500, lor the expenses of (he Board of VMters «r
the Military Academy at West Point, to their -mb’
sisfence while in actual attendance_
Afrersome debate, this motion was negatived
and turthor proceeding* took place upon the details
“< ‘l*1* W1L of which our report is necessarily dc
lerrott to the uext paper.
Before the bill was got through with, tlio Com
rnt tc: cf rote, reported