The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1869-02-18
GRANT--POLLARD.
TIE QUESTION OF COMMITMENT.
DECISION RESERVED.

In Judge Burnham's court yesterday
morning the argument on the motion of the
Commonwealth attorney to commit James
| Grant, who stands indicted for the murder of
Ii. Rives Pollard, to Jail was commenced.
The accused was present, looking we'll, and
not at all abashed. Edward A. Pollard, the
brother of the deceased, was also in at
tendance, seated by Mr.. Bundy, and within
| few-p PAGES of the accused. =------=
Judge Ould repelled the insinuation,
made by opposing counsel, that bail was
asked for Mr. Grant merely because he
was able to give any amount required.
God forbid that the speaker should ask any
privilege for man of means that he would
not demand for the poorest in the land.
What ne had said was that James Grant
was ready and willing to give bail in
amount that might be necessary to satisfy
the conscience Of the court. But he need
hardly say that there was no danger what
ever of his clients removing himself. The
court was doubtless satisfied of his entire
willingness to stand his trial and to abide
by the judgment of the court. This being
the case, where the necessity for his incar-
ceration The motion Of the Common
wealth's attorney to, commit the accused
was unheard of in the practice of this
court, and against the form Of the statute.
When party is admitted to bail by ma
gistrate his bail-bond is not disturbed by
any bill of indictment that may be framed.
Where the gentleman (Mr. Bundy) obtain
ed aprecedent for his motion to incarcerate,
the speaker was unable to learn.
MIR. Bundy, the Commonwealth attor-
ney, rejoined: He was aware that it was
not usual to make q formal motion to COM
nit, but it was the uniform practice when
a man has been indicted for murder to
commit the accused as amatter of course.
This was the first instance in the annals of
American Jurisprudence in which it has
been seriously proposed that q person in
dicted for the commission Of the highest
offence known to the Law should be enlarged
on bail. He admitted that the statute
quoted by Judge Ould allowed the court to
admit any person accused of felony to bail
but surely this was not q case for the exercise
of this discretionary power. Mrs. kirby's
case was no precedent, for bail was allowed
her, because there was reason to believe her
life would be endangered by incarceration.
Mr.. Bundy cited also the well-known
cases Of Sickles in Washington, DR.. Web
ster in, Massachusetts, and General Cole in
New York, in each of which he alleged
that the party accused of murder was every
night taken to jail, and every morning
brought to the courthouse in custody of
the officers of the law. In most os these
cases, said he, the privilege of bail was not
even asked in none was it granted.
Judge 0uld here remarked that the &C
cused had made no application for bail.
The argument was upon the motion to COM
nit, and the question was lohcther the bail
already giucn rould be set aside.
Mr.. Bundy: Well, It is q mere matter of
form.
The Court: 1t is we'll, however, Mr..
Bundy, that this matter of form should be
distinctly understood. The defendant IS
resisting q motion to commit.
Mr.. Bundy, resuming, urged that the case
did not now present the aspect that 1t did
ct the Mayors court. 1t was now no mat
ter of slight suspicion, but tWenty-four good
and dlawfu men had, upon their solemn oaths,
charged James Grant with the wilful, de-
libcrate, and premeditated murder Of a fell
low-crc rcature. In this view Of the case he
did not see how the court could for mo-
ment entertain thought Of admitting him
to bail. g." a.E
j. Harmer Gilmer, Sr., ESQ, followed
Mr.. Bundy for the prosecution, urging that
in all his experience Of thirty-tive years in
Virginia courts he had never heard nor read
of q case in which, after an indictment for
murder in the first degree, bail had been
allowed the accused except on writ of
habeaS corpus, by which the court was In
formed of the facts in the case.
The Court said: This is o new question
somewhat, and We are not yet prepared to
announce our decision. We are not advised
of any precedent for enlargement upon bail
under the circumstances. There seems to
be an impression that the court did at one
time admit defendant to bail on n charge
of murder. This is incorrect. The court
did not admit Mrs. Kirby to bail, nor did
it direct her incarceration.
Judge ould would invite your Honor's
attention to the case of Wrenn.
The Court Wrenn was first indicted for
unlawful shooting, and was then allowed
bail. Afterwards ne was indicted for muir
der; and it is our impression that the trial
went on the same day without the question
being raised. We reserve our decision for
the present. In the mean time the accused
will remain in attendance on the court.
Mr.. Grant remained in the courtroom
until late in the evening, expecting q. deci-
sion during the day, but just before the
court adjourned, Judge Burnham stated
that he desired more time for consideration.
He therefore directed that Mr.. Grant give
bond in the sum of $4,000 for his appear
ance this morning, when it is expected that
the decision will be announced. The re-
ouired bail was Immediately given, Mr..
Putney, of Putney s. Watts, becoming
bondsman for the accused. 4 r4i-a