with Notes of Reference (1803)St. George Tucker Summary View of the Judicial Courts of the Commonwealth
| 
1. Having no copy of either of the charters of Virginia, except that of Charles the second, granted in the twenty-eighth year of his reign, I cannot be particular on this subject....Nor is it, perhaps, material.
2. Beverley's History of Virginia, Pt. 1, Sec. 45. County courts were first established in 1622. See also H.V. Pt. 4, c. 6, throughout.
3. Pur is 1661, c. 19, 24, 25, 25, 31.
4. Edition of 1733, p. 28.
5. 1705, c. 19. Edition of 1733.
6. 17XX, c. 4.
7. Ibid., 1788, c. 71.
8. 1794. c. 67.
9. Ibidem.
10. Williamsburg, Norfolk, Richmond, Petersburg, Fredericksburg, Alexandria, Winchester and Staunton, are the only corporations in which courts are established.
11. Ibid. c. 92. Ib. c. 95. Ib. c. 120. Ib. c. 90, 103.
12. The cognizance of all causes not exceeding ten dollars or four hundred pounds of tobacco, belongs to the justices of the peace, any one of whom may give judgment and award execution against the goods and chattels of debtors to that amount, but he cannot award execution against the body of the debtor. 1794. c. 67, amended by act of 3800. c. 38. Sess. Acts.
13. L. V. 1748, c. 4.1794. c. 67.
14. L. V.Edi. 1764, c. 67.
15. Ibidem c. 67.
16. C. V. Art. 15.
17. Ibidem c. 73.
18. Ibidem c. 95,120.
19. C. V. Art. 15.
20. Edi. 1794, c. 80, 81, 1-16,19. C. V. Art. 15.
21. L. V. 1797, c. 8. Sess Acts.
22. Ibidem. But in suits at common law if a def. be returned "no inhabitant" of the county, the suit abates as to him. And even if he be taken, yet if he be in fact an inhabitant of any other county, he cannot be held to bail unless a mm est iirsentiu has been returned upon a capias issued against him in the same suit in the county in which he resides, or, the cause of action arose within the county or corporation where the suit may be brought. L. V. 1794, c. 80. Sec. 13., c. 67. Sec. 23.
23. 1784. c. 78.
24. Ib. 6 67.
25. Ib. c. 167. Ib. c. 103.
26. Ib. c. 74.
27. c. 17.
28. 1778, c. 9.
29. c.40.
30. 1785, c. 12.
31. 1787, c. 16., c. 39.
32. 1794. c. 65, 66.
33. The districts are Suffolk, Petersburg, New London, Washington, and the Sweet Springs in Botetourt, for the southern division of the state; Williamsburg, Richmond, Charlottesville, and Staunton, for the middle; Northumberland, Fredericksburg, Dumfries, Winchester, Hardy and Monongalia, for the northern; and Accomack, for the eastern shore.
34. Upon a question referred to the general court, it has been held, that every indictment must allege, that the offence was committed within the jurisdiction of that district court where the indictment is brought.
35. In 1792, an act passed giving to these courts chancery jurisdiction. A case soon after arose in Dumfries district court, wherein a motion was made for an injunction to stay execution upon a judgment of that court, given at a preceding term. The case was adjourned to the general court for novelty and difficulty. That court certified their opinion, that the motion ought to be over-ruled; because, the powers and duties assigned to be performed by that clause of the act, could onl) be executed by those who may be constituted judges in chancery in the manner prescribed by the constitution of the commonwealth The clause was consequently not carried into effect. See the case of Kamper and Hawkins in the general court, Nov. 16,1793.
36. 1 Strange, 150.
37. V. L. 1794, c. 95. 172.17-J7, c, 98. Accordant.
38. 1 Danvers. 752 2 Ventris. 352.
39. It may be doubted whether the high court of chancery in Virginia, hath such power as this, which is probably derived from the English Statutes concerning bankruptcy.
40. 2 Vent. 346. |iwej a to this, if the executor, when he qualified, gave sufficient security.
41. L. V. 1794, c 95. Accordant.
42. 2 Vent. 265.
43. V. L. 1794, c. 65. J. Wythe's Rep. 143.
44. Ibid, c.118.
45. V. L. 1794, c. 64.
46. Ibid. c. 167.
47. Ibid. c. 78,64.
48. V. L. 1794, c. 64.
49. V. L. c. 85.
50. Ibid. c. 104.
51. C. V. Art. 14.
52. V. L. Oct. 1777, c 15. 1788, c. 69. 17S4, c. 64.
53. V. L. 1797, c. 5.
54. 1794, c. 63.
55. Art. 3.
56. 2 Cong. c. 66.
57. 6 Cong. 2 Sess. c. 4.
58. L. U. S. 7 Cong. 1 Sess.c. 8. f ftid.7 Cong. Sess. 1. c. SI.
59. L. U. S. 1 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 20.
60. L. U. S. 3 Cong. c. 50.
61. Ibid.
62. L. U. S. 5 Cong. c. 48,49, 66.
63. L. U. S. 1 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 20.
64. L. U. S. 1 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 20.
65. L. U. S. 7 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 31.
66. L. U. S. 1 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 20.
67. L. U. S. 1 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 20.
68. L. U. S. 1 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 20.
69. L. U. S. 1 Cong. 1 Sess. c. 20.
70. L. U. S. Cong. c. 31.
71. See the case of Joseph Ravara, consul from Genoa, reported in 2 Dallas' Reports, 29r.
72. L. U. S. 1 Cong 1 Sess. c. 20.
73. Ibidem.
74. L. U. S. 1 Cong 1 Sess. c. 31.
75. C. U. S. Art. l, s. 3.3.