Newspapers / The Raleigh Minerva (Raleigh, … / May 17, 1802, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The Raleigh Minerva (Raleigh, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
mm,WS, s,m '.A- .'! wii.-.,T!; . THE NORTH CAROLINA MINERVA ttie OBt ; r be im en ly- to ' le id e- irr. OO ;oo CO 00, 3 OO 00 oo 09 'rfi' Tort las trer tlx tub. mil the de- lin. e of , tf i in tie of uch ired and tern d of a at ana pro- qua e a bich. .....fr:rnarA ' MONDAY EVENING, May. 17, i8oa. w""""'"- .i. - j . f-n fwK a North Carolina and ihe eentleman from i The following i. the ""-"-i-JX bate which took pu "c prcntatWc, on Thmfdal. the Sit. receiwJ by . ktur from . gen, t!nan at W.Ihington; 'He whjepro ceedioff. upon thi. fub eft (hew ho moch e.fierPt i. for the .pialfterul.fts.to pull iowo a good fyftem than to bu..d up even a bad pneH :i 4, iGaz " J The bill from the fenate to ameod the Judicial fvftrm of the "Unuea Otat ociug under conuairauon, v-- whom referred the gih. feftion of the bill reported a new feaion to be inferred in lietf Ot.it-,' io the words following, iz. See 6. yfnJ w tt further enaaea, l n at. wheneer nj queltioo ihU occur beJore a circuit court; upon wric uie opimona 01 the judge (hall be oppofed, the pojnt upon which the difagreement (hairhippen lhll, durina the fame term, upn the rtqieft of either paity or their counfel, be lUed un: der ibe dwection ot toe juugrs, uu nu rd under the feal of the cuiirt, to the fu ptetne court at their next fefS 0 to be held thereafter, and (hall by the laid court he finally decided. And the deolton of rv fupieme court and their order m the prcrnif es (hall be remitied,to the circtut curf & 'be there entered of record, and "lull have ff.cV according, to the ntoietit the faid u Jgment and order. Provided, that no hing herein contained fhuil ; prevent "the aufes from proceedi'g if in-the opixion fthe court, la'ther proceecrngJ can In- ad without prejudice to the. merit. Ami roviaea aijot tiut jmpiiinment-jnaii t o; alluwcd, nor punifhment in any cafe be iiflided, where the judge of the faid court 'arc divided in opinion upon the qudtioo touching the faid imprifonment or punifh roent." -'-4 ' . Mr. Henderfon called for a diiuon of. the qutftion, fo at ! ft to take a vote upon ftrikiftg out the 6"-h fedion, and fecondiy upon infe'rting the new fedion. , I Mr. S Smith and Mr. Nicholfon con tended that h queftion was not dirifible Mr. Griwolamd the qucttion certainly was diviQole i h. re were two dilt.ihct pro. poliuous. He wilhed to ftrike out tht 6 h lix&in, becaufe be deemed the proili n if it ery improper j but he could not ' t ! )oiufertthe ftdion reportfd hy the com rtnittec. He deemed the provifions or thiR ill more imperfcd. They would tend to roduce endlefs litigation. Qjcltiorib ight anle at to theadmiliihility ot teiti Hiouy. i lie judge would difide in opim on. The taufe mud ftop t a record mull be trafmitted to the fupreme couit, and there wait a year before a decifion can be Lad ; it muft then go back to the circuit court ; another difagreement may take place ; the lame comic mult again be pur fuied, and thus endleuTdelay " be produced. I Mr. bjxuttr decided that , the quettion was divifible, and the queftion on Itiiking ;out the 6h fection was taken and carried without a divifion.-' On the quellion. Jor inftrting the feftion repoitcd by the com-- A Mr. HenderfoH faid he hoped the feai "inn urnuM nm :(.,. u. j .t. . Z ' iiihihu. IUC IliU llic dion.) Gentlemen will neiceive that bv he ptovifions, eerv aucftion arifintr on a aui where the iudircs- d.fftr in od ii on. n'llarrelt the progrefs of the foil, ' until a stiuon la oaa upon it by the iupreme OUrt. It IS immaterial hr triflinir r',f oint may be upon which this di'ff. rtncc of uinion aruei. n .; k. n r..r end further Drocetdina'a until adecifion. Suppofe a witnef is ottered to orove the execution f a bond, and the defendant oh. Ijects to. hi being admuttd j the cou t di- mem opimon orr his admiffibility. The qutaion njult be fent to the fupreme conrt to have this poiiit determined "Th a.aion ,w decided in favor of the plai..iiflf-ru..on tie cafe being fubmitted ii the' jury," one ot the --pirrticatrhrA-Tjri'-t.-vrr,i-rr urot ; and here a different .rlf.. ; tK 'Hdg?.e f the cou,t a tH thc valid'"y of IIP huri o. . f , . ' . . .r" on to be heard. A-rC- i Cr ik oau A qurftion arifca, X . her 11 be received, either ss not gfwng cert.fijd according to a of Con l rels, or as not being between the fame IF."'"- Te court divide aeain. and th? jmt muft be delayed uBMlthiadifBcuhy can -I' fettled. . Tw. or te vf4,. L. the caufelfemaina in tJ. r,. r w!,.en ,t was commenced. -I alk gentlc- :mm-:z-mA.mmm ' : - " : --' - . : ..v-,-. -v. . .- .: ' . m ) :,-. .f-'-M-'v'''- r:--'m- r-y.::-- :mm': -,r."m,,r,- l' :.. I V- "':';.-:'' '' ''''-'' ;''"; .',''"' ."' ;' ' '.' , - '. '.''': .."- '''' "C.:1 ; ,:- '.' ."" '.'-,"'v- ":- ':7. ;' m. ' . 'r.' v..'- Mi 'L-'' ' -j '" -'';."''' -' '''' '" ' '' meo if ther are oreoared to fend forth a f j (lent to the people of 'A merica thui de fcftive, which pu-orts to amend the orga-' nization of the com ts of the Udited' Scate? You have aboUflied fyftemy fir, which eulured the prompt' admimltraM'on of jtiltieej gainft which' theie was no reafoo. able complaint i and tor it you luoituuu ihis mif rable piece of patch wt.ik It is an abut; of the term to call it a fyjlem, Ther is nothing lifce fitne in it, It is a fuare to entrap luuors, a,nd js cali ulaitd to en tangle juilice in a net of forms. It is in vain to lay that the j'lges will ri (Jiffc. unlef8 upoM quettiuns.wiiii.-h decide the me rit of thecaufti They are under the pb ligation of 'duty ' and ofoath, and the) mult be goveiied by tin dilates of their judgment, however temoxe 'he bearing of the otj etion takerr msy te upon tht4ulti inate" deTermination of the caufe. It is not for men to forbtar- to do what their confoence tells them is right, becatife-yur la.tf'6 are l'mpertect. Thi ftdtin is an innovation upon all lie rule of practice that I know any thing bout. It is worf , it poffi J;, than tlmck n out. That only anih juitH a delay of a i-atif; where the j'lges could not agiee io , ertain tpccihc cafrs 1 his enj'uns it on every difference of optnifii, upon any quef ion occurring bef re the circuit court it ;ither party riqnclts it. It is 'hc cor.ttanr practice nt courts, it upwi onwtmg a wit. fiefs, bee is an opptfr.i ni of opinion as to his adm fli'iility, tuiK-j ct hin. . So, upon j motion for a uew tnal it is loft, unlcb ihe comt grant it. Wl.rre there are two jijgi's they rr.ult agree, or you cannot have he objict of the motion. But by this fee ion, a difagreement, of the court puts an "end to the tiial of the csui'e until the fvi. preme court (hall have cltciikd upon thc quellioii. ' . ; ' tji cnminal. pto'ecutions, it is provide ihat 'impf ilonm-nt ftiill not he allowrd, h or r ji " ii i'flvmc n , in a o-y" "caTeV" Tflicted,. ivlieii hr judgeh are divided, in opinion, 'ouchit the impriforio.etir or punifh.nen'.. Pheti evtry other quellion producing dif 'erencc.of npinion upon a criminal profecu (ton, ncctilaiily flops the ptogtcfn of thu profrcuti iii. upon the rtqiu-ft of either par iy. A man it indiftedfor murder an ap plicafiorfis made to continue the cauieiir, on obj'dion is made to a juror or witnefs "i a qncilioii is made whethir the prifoncr 4 ei. id led to hallege peiemptorily, and vvhat number ot jurors is he entitled to ob yd to, without giving any reafon. A dif eicnce of opinion upon thefe, Or a'varicM oi other points which may arife oh the trial of.the indifttntnt, fepda the wretched pri foner to a gi-al, theie to remain for twelve months,-and when he is again brought o th bin of the 'country for tiral other ob j ftions are ftarted, ind.rhe unhappy fuf Itrer fees no end to his imprifnnmtnt, but by going to tiiiil withi.u; t hi.fr legal advan tages. which, are-the bit t!i rih.L of every American. He murt eitT.er he buried in a prifon for -life, or wavetlie. benefits which the common law of the country had given him. We nave bren taught to believe, that a malf deprived of hw liberty, is entitled to a fpeedy trial. The hcufe will judge, whe tlier this fedtion is calculated to infure this. As much as I abhor a court compofed .of a fingle j'.id)je, ! agree .with my honorable,. friend fro ,n ConnectiLUt (Mr Gnfwold) that it is preferable to thi fyilem- You had be ter modify the bill fo as to feparatr the dillrid fiom the circuit judge; This would p event the delay which mult anlr under this arrangement. It is a mockery of jufticero fend fnitnrs into this court. , Mr. Nicholfon faid the commTttee who reported this amendment were unanimous. They had drawn it with care to meet eve. ry cafe. It had occured to the committee that fime inconveniences would arife but no fyjtttn could txijl withoutthem. TW,from7hekiiowledge hich he had of courts, calcs would feldom arife in which the judges would differ., '..loathe court -wliere lie nau praciiico ror .ciunt years, wliere only to judges Jat, he lecollcfted Aut'one' cafe"ot jdifagreement and he was warranted in faying that caft provided for by thin feci ion could not be very nu mcro'is.' It W48 to be recollected that this liJl-rifMateJUio the Senate it had been here referred to a feled committe, of whii-h the gentleman from North Caroilna (Mr Hendrfjn) was one. . He could not but regret- that thefe objeftion did not there oc cur to thafcentleman. And he now regretted: that the gentleman from North Catoltna and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Grifwotd) (hould con dne their r talent to pointing out defecls ruftcid of illuminating the Houfe by fug. ettfig remedies, ' fie did not appiove the nJanVv one judge only - deciding, nor of rednng ihe dilltift j idge to a mere cy ihir " Hs j had always believed, that, in .he'multiplicitly'of counfel thrte1 is fafcty. He would give the benefit of the opinions oftbofc wi(. judges; and could not approve of a! different plan, however other may think..;: It was recefTary . to proVuritfor cafes of difagreement. The gentle man florrt Ninth Carolina fuppofes-ihe tenden cy.'of'this nicafure wilj be to trrell pro cleJlngs.i He wj of a i'itfcient npinion. The teclion priden that where a tlifa greemeftt hdppenii, the queftion lhall rrt" fcutjj J4 iaatjtMntn. .V.. But there-iir tuniicT -proviiirm, mat nic c; uic ijiau P'ccecd, ' provided, in the opinion of the judges, funher proceeding may be had wit ho.ut pitjudice to the mcrrta. hoppott a witnefs mtio.luced to prove 'a bond, and (be judfea arc divided as to hia competen cy. The gent.c-na'i frm N. Caro ina fup uiifes the tctlimony. will be lul'pend d. I'liis is not fo. Every witnefs is futpof Jto be competent until he is diiqualilicd. A witnefs is objected to on. the ground of bis competency what are the proceedings nder the dd law ? why the witnefs would be admitted the party would Hate his ob jcfttoii in a bill of exceptions, and the fu preme court would decide upon .the com -jjctency of the witnefs. A. fuel B. orr a bond, and tiffers a witnefs to' prove it whole ! teftimoy objecied toi but admitted B I carrifs up thisqtiafiion by bi'l of except i j ops, but the calc Itili proceed on ihv ie(ti- , amy f A,'s wiLnefs, and judgment i h,id i .Nnw, unltft ihe fop e e court decide that i.V witnefs wag incompetent, the judg ;rhcnt is confirmed. If the court decioe rthst the witnefs was n t competent , the progref is. litanerted inetion rails, and it the court dtxtde. or ,' ihe fhurk rrfup in liertil unit rn,m k . n hih ttt , x -j-i- ""v - - ixctptioat i J I But ihe caUic is not theiei y -ntlted, but may go on to judgment. The inconvenience of deLy would exifl it could riot be remedied, and mull be (uh mi tfd to. Why have a fupremf court,, if y'ou nfufe the benefit of an appeal to it ? The lawr-cannot fit every cafev and thiVis she reaton-of the piovilioti, viz. where the couft is divided the caufe may proceed without thu'r decifion, and the decifion of the fupreme court be filial. . A man chaj lent?e8a juior for caufe; the qceilion is intricate ; the judges d:tic:i- thrre may beT teo.OCO dullai- depending -- But, fir,- acr coning to the gentleman from North Carolina, -hen a man's property, tm all . the fubliftcnce of himfelf and his family are depending, you will not give him an opportunity of a deciliou of the fupreme court. Every quellion' need net be cam ed to that court. Cuunf.1 mult think it of fufficient ' importance-, & if fo, where is he i ju:tice of it I If the qutltion in not of migoi. tide', counfel would not hazard his reputation; in carrying, it up " The judge, in tricing cifc would be afhamtd to have his opinion reviewed. Tho gentleman from North Carolrfia tells us of another .I..VK a.ifp .-hihfr rnrrt U properly certified or is proper evidence. " i ' . - Is this a matter of fo much importance J ami difficulty : Can judges think fo light ly of their chara&t r as to dif. gree in "ui h trifling quellioiiB cafes of difficulty, doubt and importance ought to go updone judge onyht not to decide when there fits a man by him equally capable with bjmfclf. As to the provifions rcfpecfliug criminal cafes he thought them iinimpoctar.r."- - ' Mr. Grifuold fa,id that other difficulties would arife from the fettion which had not been alluded to. A the law now Hands, no writ of error can be taten to, the fu preme court, where the matter in dilp.ujte Ldoes not exceed, zOOO dollars, but. if the frrftion it agreed to,, every caule may be removed from the '"circuit. to the fupreme courts, whed the judgf differ in... opinion, and as the jurifdick ion of the circuit court is extended to caufes of 500 dollars con feqnence, thofe caufes may be taken up to the fupreme court, and a party living at th&diftance of eight or nine hundred miles from the feat of government may be fent i not only. once,TSutas often as the judges differ, to the feat of government, for a de cifion of ltts taufe, 'and mud be compelled. , either to .carry hi counfel from houi'e, o employ new counfel, with whofe tatenrsan ' integrity be ia unacquainted, at the Vol. VIL Numb. 39 penfe of t wice hi debt to manage lis caufi ac ineiopreme Court. I hi nra not anly a haidmip'ijpon thofe who lived remote from tbc feat of -government, burin abfo Jute mockery of jurlice t that it would dri evciyuitor from the national court, be. caufeo man would dare to conic inio court for jutiice, where he wa xpofed ' to be driven, upon every difference of Opinion in rh, judgtt. to the fupreme court for de cifioiit. ' He faid, if gentle men were de termined 'to' proltraie the' courts, and furr nifh tbe.preiidciit with' a new caufe for feorfii k us his doc omt hts telating to the paucity of luus ' they could tibi adbpt aiore effectual planV ' -3. : ? MwG'i futJ the jiidgt differed Yn jpini-:. on Upon callaitrai anrlilnn mnra ffmiiMrv ; m.?riu of ht caufe . a id upan evei y -ftiffr r -r j encc. mic cauu: trun De Iflc'iretl Io.- tnc III,' j prcme CuUi t, and the liiial dtciflon poil-' j pooej utitil the opiiiiwi of the fupreme court lhouiJ be known : tor although the lection piovidci that thv caufe may proceed, notwiihitatiding the difference of the iudg es, if fuch can be the conrfe withounpre judiceto the mrrit, yet it is certain that. , theie collateral points wre g'neraily con- ' oecied with the merit . for in (lance j a ' witnefs is offer'-d, and the judge are.di vided up..n hiii comprtencyi this will al-' way aff. cl the nieriis, and. frequently the caufe cli-pends upon the teftimony of a fin . gle iviitii-fs : oi. a juror is objtdcd t , and iheju.le do not aree uptti. that queition, . it will not be doubted ' but-tha- this it a poin which affed the final d-a'fion and meiin of lTie'Vaure";"rbr"nfTo(h''ngcan be ' more important than q le'lions which re late to tiie co npetence of jurrt or the fo ru ti berore -wb;ch the party it to be tried. He laid tha; he doubted the correftriefi - of the opinion of tne guntleman from Ma ryland refpedliug the adm ffi -n of a wit nrfs on whou' c!fmjji-teucy thjr jgfgeg wete h-red a witnefs in c urt neceff.i'ily took the - . . ; nf .1. ' .1 t om niij us ui im- ciucuion it was a mo tion for admitting the witi'itf; and ur'fa the ju lgr8 decided for hm ailmiffi,.n. he inclined 10 believe I hat he mud bt uj..cVd. In th lta'te io which he belonged no fuch cafes could arif?, becaufe ihe laA' in ihat Hate duedVjl uthat the preiiding jad g e2 fliould have acaitint; vote in all cafes where thejulges were, qu .llv diviled. He pre fumed, however, m thofe flate where no fuch proviiion exilled, the courfe of pro ceeding rtu(t be as he had dated. 'Ihe gentleman from Maryland, faid 1 Mtv complaint that we hive only found fault with tht prelent bill, without propof. ing a fubflitute. He faid that he woold.' now propofe a fubltitu e.it was to revive the law which had been Io lately reprsled, , and if gentlemen would not agree to that, he would propofe again ; that rhe circut courts lh-11 be h.ld by a finglejudge. and although he could fay, wiih his friend from" North Carolina, that he abhorred a court thus organized, with the extenlive crimi nal and civil jurifdidion of the ciicuit court, yet as bad as it was, he fully believ ed that it was the lead of tht two evil He faid that he agreed with the gentleman ! Itiim. Mary land, that the maxim which, j .u... . :.. .1. e r.i utll Jicu liiul in inc. ill u tt 1 1 nu c yr coumc there was fality," was "fublUntially ' cor rect, but he thought the gentleman fiom Maryland nought to have recolleded thi maxim when he gave his vote for repealing; a law which organized the circuit eourti" with hrce judges and leduced us to the neccfCiy of reducing the court to a fi gle judge, or leaving it with two judges with out the power of deciding. , After Mr. Grifwold fat down, Mr. Williams of.Nrth Carolina rofe, and fpoke to the following effedl : The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Grifwold) has dilcovcred to us the true., reafon of hs oppnfition to this bill, viz. the, ct of lad f-flion has been repealed. Th. fe who voted for that repeal are willing to take the refpopfihility upon themfclvet. It is much eafiet to find fault with a fydm than to make one. My colleague (Mr. Henderfon has faid: it would be better to have no fertion than the ce proiyofed.' Mr. Williams could not agree in that opinion delay, he:atknowledg-ed!ra-mittht.ij.c pta( duced for, ore 'or two terms, uttdeT theproj vifiuns of this feflion, but the evil of delay would not be equal to that of having no decifion. He thought thefe ( provifiooi preferable to thofe of the; original "feftion. Uudci ihst (eclion caufci muit be lufpend- t I f i - f l' ;'i ' . t. . If it f '! ( - '" v "i : ; : 1 mm Amu '''-'-'" r r : . V "' I I,' i!" .4-'v';f' ' 1 I ,1 r- - . v "A .1', !1 t: - w - - v'."".'it "' ' rv'te ...:,':h:Sji' .. r-- -f,4y- $,, m-fkl 1 ji ..a . - J 'V
The Raleigh Minerva (Raleigh, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
May 17, 1802, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75