An admirable charge.
The Petersburg
Express publishes an admirable charge to the
Grand Jury of the Circuit Court of
Petersburg, by
the Hon. Thomas S. Gholson, a Judge who, in ability and conservative spirit, would have done honor to the Bench of
Virginia in its best and brightest days.
The Grand Jury have done the community a public service in requesting this charge for publication.
The spirit of Lawlessness, which is undermining the whole framework of society and government on this continent, is the subject of this admirable charge.
In a former charge, which was also published,
Judge Gholson, referring to the tumult and disorder in the land, showed that they were the legitimate results of the spirit of disobedience and impatience under restraint, everywhere manifest.
In the first charge, he inquires why this spirit of disobedience!
this impatience under restraint!
And these inquiries he thus answers:
‘
"They spring, in my opinion, from imperfect and erroneous ideas as to what constitutes rational freedom.
There is prevalent a vague and undefined notion, that government is free in proportion as license is allowed the citizens.
No such vagary had possession of the minds of our ancestors when they instituted our Government — No!
They had been tried in the furnace of self-denial, and were accustomed to restraint.
They had devoted, and were ready to devote, themselves and their substance to their country.
They had governed and restrained themselves, and knew what was meant by the declaration, 'that man is capable of self-government.' But we have now had almost uninterrupted peace and prosperity for more than half a century.
Most of the present generation are free, without ever having themselves made a single struggle, or undergone single sacrifice for freedom.
It is the birth-right of every citizen, and seems natural, easy and cheap.
They forget the immense sacrifices and toils with which our liberties were purchased, and do not remember that we can preserve them only by restraining our passions and rendering daily obedience to the laws of the land.
No people understand and appreciate the spirit and substance of liberty, who are not ready to make, and who do not make, sacrifices for her maintenance.
No people are capable of self-government who will not and do not feel the necessity for, and by their acts acknowledge, the supremacy of the law. A liberty that costs nothing, is worth nothing.
"Men desire to do as they please.
They violate the laws and think they should not suffer for it. There could be no freedom if such opinions were to prevail.
A strong man could with impunity despoil his weak neighbor of his goods, but he would not be happy or free; for a 'stronger than he' would come and in like manner despoil him of his goods.
The weak and helpless would be at the mercy of the strong, and the strong carry on continued warfare among themselves.--To let men do as they please, is to destroy liberty by banishing peace and order.
Few, if any, are bold enough openly to favor such a state of things.
All desire the advantages of good government, but there are too many who are unwilling to pay their part of the cost, by rendering individual personal obedience to the laws.
And it is right here the error of the present day lies.
"The youth of the country witness what transpires, and seeing how reluctant men are to obey, thus are led, without reflection, to regard the law as a hard master, forgetting that it is made by the people themselves.
They express sentiments at war with the spirit of our laws; think that men should be permitted to redress their own wrongs; justify dueling, while it is forbidden; see their comrades commit crime, and declare they would acquit, lawyer no law. Thus.
many of our young men, who, to defend the liberties of their country, if assailed by an enemy, would bare their bosoms and pour out their blood, all without being conscious of it, lending their influence to sap the very foundations of liberty itself.
They encourage a spirit of insubordination, and may, by the time they grow older and wiser, find they will not be able to direct the storm themselves have helped to raise."
’
Judge Gholson proceeds to argue that our people must learn and feel that in order to preserve our free institutions, it is necessary that they render, in word and deed, obedience to the law, and be willing to yield their individual views and purposes when they clash with law and public policy.
He then shows the justness and reasonableness of legal requirements and restraints.
If they summon you to the battle field in war, it is that you may help defend your own liberties; if you are required in peace to pay taxes, it is that your own government may be supported; if to do duty as jurors and witnesses, your neighbors are called upon to render similar service to you; if to keep the highways smooth and even, it is that you, as well as others, easy travel with comfort and safety.
Then, as to the restraints of the law:
‘
"There is no restraint, unless it be to prohibit what is wrong in itself, or what, if done, would be injurious to others.
You can do as you please with what is yours, provided you do not thereby injure others.
The farmer may build his ice-pond on his land but he cannot raise his dam so high as to overflow his neighbors' land; for if he would do so, then another neighbor might in like manner overflow his land.
"But our laws permit us to do whatever is right in itself, and not injurious to others — and this is the soul and substance of true liberty.
No government can, without sin permit what is wrong, and it is the duty of all governments not to allow one to do what is injurious to another.
"We can acquire property and dispose of it as we please — go where we choose — worship God according to the dictators of our own conscience — think and act for ourselves — marry and give in marriage — have an equal participation in making the laws by which we are to be governed — live in our own dwellings, no matter how humble, and be protected in our persons and property.
What more can rational beings ask. And for these should not every good man be willing and anxious to render a full and hearty obedience to the laws?
"We educate our children to read and write — we teach them Latin and
Greek — we tell them of the ways of the world, and guard them against the wiles of men. Do we teach them to love and obey the laws?
Do we show them, explain to them, that the young men of the land, must be strong in virtue, and ready in obedience, in order to perpetuate our freedom?
Do we instill into their minds a love of peace and order?
Do we take the pains to pour out to them the unhappy consequences which result to society from acts of violence and wrong?
I am persuaded that there is in this respect a great remissness, and that, if parents did their duty towards their children, that our young men, instead of entering upon life, as is now too frequently the case, without "chart or compass," and liable to be driven hither and thither by their hot and ardent passions, would go chastened by conservative principles, and become the only sure foundation upon which free institutions can permanently "
’
