644 THE CHANCELLOR'S CASE.

we wish you to return us the bills, that we may determine on
them."

To this message from the Senate, the Delegates on the 23d of
the same month made the following reply: " May it please your
honours—This House have considered your message of the 19th
instant, by James Lloyd, Esquire. We are very desirous of mak-
ing a liberal provision for the governor, the chancellor, and the
judges; and wish the circumstances of our people would justify
this House in acceding to the salaries proposed by the Senate. If
time will permit, we shall attempt to provide particular funds, to
secure the payment of the salaries established by our bill. It will
always be in the power, as it will certainly be in the inclination of
the legislature, to make such alterations in the present salaries, as
the ability of government will permit.

"As the chancellor must necessarily have great trouble, from the
number of disputes relative to the grants of lands, we are willing to
make him compensation; and to add a clause to the bill for the civil
list, allowing him the sum of ———— for the next year.

" This House will consent to limit the number of judges in the
Court of Appeals; and that when any vacancy may happen, the
number shall not exceed three, until the abilities of the State will
justify an increase of the establishment."

Soon after the sending of the last of these messages, on the 7th
of February, 1786, the act of 1785, ch. 27, received the assent of
both Houses, and became a law. This is the first legislative act
which secured to the chancellor and judges their salaries during
the continuance of their commissions.

This review, which we have taken of the first nine years of the
Republic, shows, that during the whole of that time, that provision
of the thirtieth article of the Declaration of Rights, which requires
the legislature to secure to the chancellor and judges their salaries
during the continuance of their commissions, was waived. But the
reason why it was so left dormant and inoperative, is most satis-
factorily shown. The causes were imperative and uncontrollable;
they amounted almost to a physical impossibility to give effect to »
that provision of the Declaration of Rights. Such causes have, at
various times, been held to be an allowable excuse, for the widest
departures from some of the most important provisions of the Con-
stitution. Thus, in the year 1780, when this State was immi-
nently threatened with being made the immediate seat of war, the
governor was invested with the dangerous power of seizing any