PREFACE. The following sketches of John Howe Peyton, by some of his contemporaries, and the scanty material gleaned from an imperfect file of the Republican Farmer (newspaper) of 1811-12, and from the Staunton Spectator from 1838 to 1847, (between 1 ... Read more

PREFACE. The following sketches of John Howe Peyton, by some of his contemporaries, and the scanty material gleaned from an imperfect file of the Republican Farmer (newspaper) of 1811-12, and from the Staunton Spectator from 1838 to 1847, (between 1811 and 1830, only a few mutilated and unbound Staunton newspapers exist,) and a small parcel of family papers, letters, etc., which escaped destruction during the civil war; are all that can be found to throw any light upon the life of one of Virginia's purest men and greatest lawyers. And thus his fame must largely rest upon the applause and praises, which his efforts called forth, with his immediate hearers and admirers. This deplorable want of material for a portrayal of his life and character, is not peculiar to his case. Few of those who have astonished their contemporaries by their wit and genius, and who were held in the highest admiration in their day, have left behind them memorials sufficient to justify their fame. This is so as to many of Virginia's eminent lawyers, and of even some of her most renowned public men. As to some of these the record is decidedly nebulous. Patrick Henry left behind such scanty remains, that great as were his oratorical talents and patriotic services, his fame rests rather upon the praises of others, than upon what he left behind of his own work. In this reflected or traditional way, his record is splendid, and so is that of John Howe Peyton, who, without overrating his merits and doing injustice to the memory of any of the jurists of the time, may be styled the greatest legal genius of his day. The universal opinion of his contemporaries goes to prove that in the science of criminal or penal law, of civil injuries or torts, and as a Public Prosecutor he had no equal, and it is as well established that in no department of the law had he any superiors. And this want of material is equally true of his great contemporaries, such as Daniel Sheffey, B. W. Leigh, and Chapman Johnson, so that like his, their fame rests on tradition. Alas, that they had not left something of their own productions—enough, at least, to enable us to have measured them as thinkers, writers and speakers. That they were all great men is beyond a doubt, for it is only the great man who touches the heart of the people, as well as their intelligence. Less