Some Virginia JLawyers of the Past and Present.
155
Moving to Richmond, where he had a hear Clay, Cass, Benton, Douglass, Calhoun and the other great men who were then in large practice in the Court of Appeals, in the United States Senate. He studied law several important cases, I am told, he had in the office of Judge Hunter H. Marshall, for his opponent the judge who had signed a learned and able lawyer, and for years a his license to practice, and, to his great leader at the Richmond bar. In 1853 he satisfaction, he beat him. In 1833, when began practicing and attended the courts of the new Court of Appeals was elected, it was a very serious question as to whether Charlotte, Prince Edward and Halifax, meet Judge Burks' term had ended, and, there ing some of the most accomplished lawyers fore, whether Judge in Virginia. The able Hinton could take jurist, William Leigh, his place. Mr. Henry was the judge of the was counsel forJudge Circuit, and when, in Burks. The court i857,Judge Marshall room was crowded succeeded him, he with lawyers and the turned over his large case attracted much practice to his former attention. It was pupil. conceded that Mr. One of the first Henry's argument cases that brought was very powerful. him distinction was A very important Maitland vs. Deshacase of Mr. Henrys zer. The case had was " The Trustees been on the docket of the Presbyterian of Charlotte circuit Church vs. Guthrie" court so long that which involved the the counsel first en gaged were dead. It doctrine of charities was a case of eject in Virginia. The old ment. The difficulty law had been made was to prove a con by a decision of Judge Henry St. George nected line of title in WILLIAM WIRT HENKY, the plaintiff. Part of Tucker, while presi the evidence was an dent of the Court of Appeals, in a case many years before. Mr. old deed, filed with the clerk, but only par tially proved for record. The case had once Henry was opposed by Henry St. George Tucker, the clever grandson of the judge, been to the Court of Appeals, and it had de who was assisted by his distinguished father, cided that this deed should not be read as evi dence unless it was fully proved. However, J. Randolph Tucker, and they made every in another case, the court had reversed its effort to sustain the decision. Mr. Henry decision. Mr. Henry was employed for the expressed admiration for the filial piety of plaintiff and was opposed by Wood Boul- these gentlemen in attempting to save their ancestor's opinion from assault, and com din, afterwards judge of the Court of Ap peals. After a hard fought battle he won, pared the scene in court "to that of the pious yEneas when he left Troy, bearing and his success bringing him much reputa upon his shoulders the body of his father tion, he was elected Commonwealth's at torney, holding the office a number of years. and leading his son by the hand."
