Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1869-09-28
EXTRAORDINARY ACTION.


At the Circuit Court on Tuesday last the
case of the State of West Va. Us. Middlekauff
was called up for trial, when, to. the astonish-
ment of nearly every person present, Ez Gov.
Stanton moved change of venue. We had
heard before that day an intimation of such
action, but did not suppose that it would ever
be arrived at.
The basis of this motion on the part of the
State, or rather on the part of the prosecu>
ton, was two afhdayits-one of Mr.. Stanton
and the other of Mr.. Beltzhoover, who stands
in the shoes of the States Attorney, whoisnow
sick over in Pennsylvania. Both these affi-
davits assert in the most positive manner that
the State could not have fair trial in JEFF
ferson county, on account of the great public
excitement and the strong current of public
there were no counter afidavits put in by the
counsel for the defence, Judge Chapline fell
compelled to grant the motion, and the case
was ordered to Berkeley county; but, subse-
quently, on motion of the defendant, it was
sent to Hampshire.
We have no fault to find with Judge Chap.
line-indeed, his course throughout the whole
affair has proven him to be fair and upright
Judge but the conduct of Stanton and Beltz-
hoover deserves, and has received, the severest
condemnation. Neither of these imported
attorneys has any such knowledge of public
sentiment in this county as would justify them
in swearing to such statements as are con-
tanned in their afidavits. The former re-
sides at Wheeling, we believe, and is rarely
in this county. He came to Charlestown, it
is true, on the Sunday before the trial, went
to church, got his dinner and went back to
Shepherdstown. The latter, Mr.. Beltzhoover,
lives at Shepherdstown, but has little or no
acquaintance with our people. They both
knew that under the laws of West Virginia,
none of the friends of Middlekauff are al
lowed to serve on any of the juries of the
Court, for the reason of their inability to take
the iron-clad oath which is invariably required
here of all jurors. To say the least of it, the
action of the prosecuting lawyers up to this
point in the proceedings. was unusual-for,
although the law under which they acted is
as old as the Code of 1919, and maybe older,
this is the first time we have ever heard of
the State asking for change of venue. Peo-
pie could not help smiling at the bare idea of
two men SO utterly unacquainted with our
people, and, therefore, necessarily SO utterly
ignorant of public sentiment deliberately
swearing that fair trial could not be had.
On the next day these lawyers moved the
Court to re-insert Berkeley instead of Hamp-
shire in the order of removal and, that fail
ing, they then asked leave to withdraw their
original motion for change of venue, the re-
suit of which, of course, would have been to
keep the case in Jefferson county, but thanks
to the uprightness of the Judge, they were
not permitted toplay out this disgraceful farce.
What is to be thought of lawyers swearing
one day that fair trial could not be had here,
and the next asking for trial here? Does
net their conduct Convict them of tan1pcring
with justice, of swift swearing, and of other
improper professional conduct? Ought such
men to be entrusted in any public professional
capacity, and are they fit persons for the State
to select to aid in the enforcement of the
laws? These are questions which we hear
made daily, and the answers honest people
make to them show their contempt for the
two chief actors.
The facts in this case, as developed in the
two trials had before magistrates, have been
already published in this paper, and there is
no need to go over them again but We take
occasion, again, to say, that while we have
perfect confidence in the entire innocence of
Mr. Middlekauff, we arc just as fully satisfied
that Mrs. Sullivan, the prosecuting witness,
believes every word she has sworn to, to be
''the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth"