THE CHANCELLOR'S CASE.—1 BLAND. 601

and Judges ought to be secured, and that the Legislature could
not constitutionally diminish or withhold them at pleasure. But
the Delegates, it seems, could not be persuaded, that the State
then had it in its power, or could raise the funds to secure those
salaries as required by the Constitution. These messages need no
comment. Yet it will be well to recollect, that some of those, who
approved those messages, had been themselves distinguished mem-
bers of that Convention which framed the Constitution.

At the November Session of 1783, this subject was again taken
up, and a committee appointed by the House of Delegates, "to
consider what arrangements might be necessary and proper writh
regard to the civil establishment;" who reported, " that the Chan-
cellor, the Judges, and other officers on the civil establishment
holding commissions during good behavior, ought to be rendered
independent by having salaries annexed to continue during their
continuance in office," which report was concurred with. In eon-
sequence *of which the same committee made a further
report to the House, specifying sundry articles as being, in 641
their opinion, "proper objects of taxation for establishing perma-
nent funds, for the payment of moneys that become due on the
civil list." But on the second reading of this report, the laying
of taxes on the proceedings in Courts of law and equity, which was
considered as the most productive of the ways and means for rais-
ing the proposed fund, was rejected; and the aggregate of the
residue not being sufficient for the payment of the civil list, the
whole project failed. Hence, owing solely to the declared ina-
bility to provide funds, the judicial salaries were again settled for
the current year and no longer.

At the next session leave was given, in the House of Delegates,
to bring in a bill to establish a permanent fund for the payment of
salaries to the Chancellor and Judges, during the continuance of
their commissions; and a bill was accordingly reported to the
House; but it seems to have been virtually superseded or nega-
tived by the civil list bill, in which, as reported, the salaries of
the Chancellor and Judges were to have been secured to them,
" during the continuance of their commissions;" but, those words
were stricken out on the second reading, by a majority of only one
vote, and the bill was thus passed, bestowing the judicial salaries
" for the current year only.'' At this session the propriety of giving
to judicial salaries the requisite constitutional security had been
introduced and pressed upon the attention of the General Assembly
by the intendent of the revenue in the conclusion of his report, in
which he says, "Permit an old servant to recommend to your
most serious consideration, the increasing of the Chancellor's and
the Judges of the General Court's salaries. The present allowance
will not support them, whilst provisions and other necessaries con-
tinue at their present prices. Your lives, liberties and properties,