Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The legal objection to the act of 1748 was also one of the narrowest kind, and was, in reality, scarcely tenable.

Admitting, as a general rule, that the acts of a colonial legislature were not valid without the royal assent, it could not well be denied, that a legislature, situated at such an immense distance from the mother country, must be supposed to possess some discretionary power to proceed without direct authority from home in a case of real necessity, and this was obviously one of that kind. The state of the crop could not be ascertained much in advance of the time when it would be brought to market; and, in order to meet the emergency, the law must be enacted, and carried into effect, before, in that day of protracted voyages and slow communications, there would be time to submit it to the eye of majesty. If substantial justice required the adoption of such a measure, and it was really impossible, under the circumstances, to have the royal assent, the act might well have been regarded, even without such assent, as technically valid; more especially as the mutual prerogatives of the local and imperial governments were far from being accurately settled. At all events, the right, taking into view both law and equity, was by no means so clearly on the side of the clergy as Mr. Wirt represents

it; and it is not at all surprising that the champions of the planters, arguing the case, as they probably did, chiefly on grounds of common sense and substantial justice, were able to make a strong impression upon the minds of the people.

The affair was brought before the king in council; and that body, sustaining naturally enough the construction of the law, and favorable to the royal prerogative, declared the act of 1758 null and void, for want of the royal assent. Finding themselves supported in their pretensions by this high authority, the clergy undertook to enforce them by legal process, and commenced a number of suits for the recovery of their salaries in tobacco, of which that instituted by Maury was one. Another of the same kind was commenced in the same county by the Rev. Patrick Henry, who has already been mentioned as the orator's uncle. Henry was not employed by his interesting cause is a strong proof that little was yet expected, even by those who knew him best, and felt the deepest interest in his welfare, from his future efforts in his new profession.

The fact that uncle in this

The plaintiff, in this case of Maury, as I have remarked before, founded his claim in the statute of 1748. The defendant pleaded specially that of 1758; and to this plea the plaintiff demurred;

or, in other words, replied that this act could not operate, in law, to set aside the plaintiff's claim; first, because it had not received the royal assent, and, secondly, because it had been declared null and void by the king in council. The legal question was argued at the November term of the year 1763, by Mr. Lyons for the plaintiff, and Mr. John Lewis, for the defendants, when the court, "very much," says Mr. Wirt, "to the credit of their candor and firmness, breasted the popular current by sustaining the demurrer." The clergy, having obtained a decision of the court in their favor, on the only objection that had been raised by the planters, naturally considered their cause as gained. It only remained for a jury to give the damages; but this was regarded as a merely formal proceeding, because the amount was supposed to be settled by the statute of 1748. The action was continued for this purpose; but the counsel for the defendants, Mr. Lewis, viewing the only point of importance as settled, and his services as no longer necessary, retired from the case. It was at this stage in the progress of the affair, and in consequence of the retirement of Mr. Lewis, that Patrick Henry was retained by the defendants. Probably the case was now supposed to have been brought within so narrow a compass, that it might be safely intrusted to a

junior member of the bar, hitherto unknown to

the public.

Whatever may have been the views of the defendants in retaining him, Henry, on being applied to, consented to take charge of the affair, and to argue the question of damages before the jury. The case came on for trial on the 1st of December, 1763, before the county court, in which the father of Henry sat as presiding magistrate. The position of the young barrister was, in fact, a rather singular one. He was to speak, for the first time in open court, before his own father, as presiding magistrate, in a case in which the court had already given a deliberate opinion in favor of the other party, and in which his uncle was interested against him.

The excitement on the subject was so great throughout the colony, that, even at this late period in the proceedings, a large audience attended, not only from Hanover, but from the neighboring counties. The clergy, in particular, appeared in great force, and among them came the orator's uncle. On seeing him approach, Henry walked up to him, in company with Colonel Meredith, and expressed his regret at seeing his uncle there. "Why so?" inquired

the uncle. "Because," replied Henry, "I fear that, as I have never yet spoken in public, I shall be too much overawed by your presence to do

justice to my clients.

Besides," he added, "I shall be under the necessity of saying some hard things of the clergy, which it may be unpleasant to you to hear." His uncle now censured him for having undertaken the case on the side of the planters, which Henry excused by saying that he had had no offer from the clergy; and that, independently of this, his own heart and judgment were on the side of the people. He then requested his uncle to leave the ground. "Why, Patrick," said the old gentleman, with a good-natured smile, "as to your saying hard things of the clergy, I advise you to be cautious, as you will be more likely to injure your own cause than theirs. As to my leaving the ground, I fear, my boy, that, with such a case to defend, my presence will do you but little harm or good. Since, however, you seem to think otherwise, and desire it of me so earnestly, you shall be gratified." He then entered his carriage again, and returned home.

This little anecdote, which I have given nearly in the words of Mr. Wirt, is equally creditable to both parties, and affords a pleasing proof of the mutual good feeling, which, under somewhat trying circumstances, was maintained among the different members of the family. It is impossible to do full justice to the scene that followed,

« AnteriorContinuar »