declaration, a mode of pleading which, though old as the English law
itself, was a novelty in the borough; and the Court refused to receive
it. Mr. Tazewell took a bill of exceptions to the District Court at
Suffolk. The point of the demurrer was that the action should have been
trespass _vi et armis_. The District Court affirmed the decision of the
Borough Court; and an appeal was taken to the Court of Appeals, which
reversed the decision of the inferior courts. Until this time the
distinction, which is merely technical, had been hardly perceptible to
the courts of England and of this country, and was by no means settled
law; but thereafter the points of difference were regarded as clearly
defined; and both in England and in the courts of the United States, the
case of Taylor vs. Rainbow has always been cited as conclusive of the
question.

The other case, which was one of the last in which he appeared at the
Virginia bar, was Long vs. Colston, and was argued in 1820, in the Court
of Appeals. His associate in the case was Mr. Wickham, and the opposing
counsel were Gen. Walter Jones and Mr. Stanard; and it was decided by
Judges Roane, Cabell, and Coalter. The arguments of Tazewell are not
stated; but Mr. Gilmer, who reports the decision, laments that no
official reporter was present "to give to the profession even a sketch
of the profound and comprehensive views of the counsel." The question
was on the doctrine of Covenant; and I am told by learned counsel who
have examined Mr. Tazewell's notes in the case, that this was, in their
opinion, the greatest forensic display ever made in this country.

I recall an anecdote which was current at the time, and which shows the
effect of Tazewell's argument on the court. Roane, one of the judges
whose reputation has been held almost sacred in Virginia, was not
prejudiced in favor of Tazewell, in consequence of old political feuds;