The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1869-03-02

until there was a large crowd besides ,s, persons
directly interested in the trial. me court
oncoeionad hv tho discussion by counsel Of GER
tain disnuted points In the sixth bill OF excep-
tons, which had been prepared on saturday,
and awaited the signature OF the j age.
hearing Of the evidence. Messrs. J. Marshall
Hanna, Robert 3. Craddock, W. F. Knox,
Samuel A. Eaton, Herbert Smith, E. u.
Moore. W. ". Slower, S: r. Sutherland, Cap.
Clinton DR.. T P. Mayo, Ernest Wilt, and
Lewis Garter, witnesses for the Common
wealth, were called, and sworn.
TESTIMONY OF AR. HANNA.
Mr. J. Marshall Hanna was the first wit
ness examined. He was strictly questioned
and cross-questioned, and was on the stano
for fully two hours and half. Mr.. hanna
uuainted with Fl Riyes Pollard in his llfe-
time On the morning of the oath of Novem-
Der ut about half-past o'clock we came 10
town together for the purpose OF attending 10
the editorial duties Of the paper. We rode IN
n light wagon. and arrived at the office little
after 10 o'clock. We alighted and went TO-
wards the door on Fourteenth street. MT.
Pollard was 4 little in advance Oh me. Sud,
denly there was n report OF gun, and ne Tell
upon the pavement, uttering only an eXcia-
| nation like "ugh." He lived only 4 few
| minutes thereafter. I examined the body, ana
| found that it had been penetrated by DUCK
| shot-one of which entered the neck, another
| the heart where the others went L DO not
| knoyr exactly but the wounds seemed TO be
| all on the right side. as he was going along
Fourteenth street. / went up Win the poay
| to the editorial room. and there exn1nined Tue
wounds of which / have spoken. Mr. foiiaro
foil on his face; his cane was IN MS rient
hand, and he was about putting MS groves III
his pocket with his left when ne was shot.
did not see him fall but heard his eXclama-
ton of pain. M
Cross.eyamined We came to town in Mr.
Radford's wagon, rs we had been doing daily
ever since Mr.. Pollard disposed OF MS morse.
was six or eight feet from the deceased when
he fell He was about eight feet from the OIL
fIca door and probably twenty from the cor
ner of Main street. / had stopped TO speak 10
the driver of the wagon, Mr.. Redford nau
not been paying any special attention 10 WI.
Pollard's movements. not anticipating any
thing noticed particularly that he had q cane
and gloves in hand. picked up glove ana
his hat and cane. The wound in deceaseds
neck was on the right side, as he went up
Fourteenth street. We were going to the Of
flee of the Souttern Opinion. Mr.. Pollard was
editor of that paper, and had been since j une
18th 1867 1t WAS weekly journal, issued on
Saturday. A number had been issued on the
Saturday preceding the shooting. was en-
poyed on the paper rs a th ahoo,ing 9th
Mr.. Pollard. I was residing in town at the
time, but spent that night with him at ms re.
quest Had conversation with him about
the article, or the matter.
TIE ARTICLE.
Judge Ould Did you say article? What
article
Mr.. Gimer: He said matter.
Judge Ould Did you not say article, NIT.
Hanna?
Witness: corrected myself
Judge Ould: But did you not say article
That is the question.
Witness: did, but corrected myself.
To the last question Mr.. Gilmer objected.
He submitted that the cross. examination
should be strictly confined TO the SUBJECT OF
the examination in chief Gross examination
was simply for the purpose of testing the
truth or the accuracy of the witness on his
examination in chief. The defence In inns case
is that the party accused did not do the act,
and therefore the issue is rot as TO any prece-
dent act or antagonsm, but the inquiry must
be strictly confined TO the murder ana ITS at
tendant circumstances. Until plea OF pro-
vocation is put in by the accused, the defence
cannot admit the act and attempt TO prove oy
the Commemorative witnesses that it was
Unsuitable He did not dispute that the ac-
cused had 4 right to introduce evidence 10
prove a proyocation, but denied his right 10
ask Of the States witness a question Whlcn
tends to trace the deceased and the accused in
precedent relations to prove 4 continued pro-
vocation The accused could not make 4 dou-
BILE plea" not guilty. and elf guilty, JUST.
fable, and therefore not guilty in the eye OF
the law
Colonel Johnson insisted that the witness
should be allowed TO tell everything he knew
in regard to the matter. This was necessary
TO the proper administration OF justice. Inc
reDresen tative of the Commonwealth, Mr. Git.
mer. had made some most extraordinary state
ments involving new law 10 the speaker. he
had even assumed to indicate the line OF de-
| fence to he followed by the prisoner upon the
isolated fact that the act was not committed
nv him We do hold that he was " not
guilty but should we be mistaken III that,
| then it will rest with the jury to decide wha t
| grade of homicide it was. 1t had been brought
| ont that the witness was editorially connected
| with the Southern ODinion and it was then
| asked whether he and the deceased had held
any conversation about the reputed murderer.
| The reply was that they had held converse:
tion aboilt tthe article They now desired
| TO know of Mr.. Hanna what he meant by
| these words in contradistinction to the words
subsequently used-yiZ., " the matter" was
| ANYTHING more reasonable, when it was evil
| dent that the words spoken by the deceased
| referred in some way TO the accused? lie
| hoped that his Honor would not gag the wit
| ness but would allow him TO tell everything
| he knew that would be likely TO throw light
| upon the case
Judge Ould desired only to make 4 few re-
| marks in addition to what had already been so
| well said by his associate. Whenever ques-
ton has been asked and answered it is per-
| fecuIy proper TO inquire what the witness
| means by his answer, or by any particular
| word or term used. Some new law had been
| advanced by the gentleman (Mr. Gilmer) about
cross. examination. Was it his purpose to ex-
cude the truth in regard to the matter OF pro-
| vocation The question was a very narrow
one and he felt sure that the court would
| have no difficulty in determining it,
| Mr.. Bundy said it was not the purpose OF
the Commemorative attorney, or OF his asso-
| cate to exclude anything bearing upon the
| case Anything germane to the subject under
| consideration may be gone into on cross ex.
| animation, but the defence had no right TO in
| quire into u matter not mentioned on the eX-
| animation in chief but brought out by their
| own questions. This was an attempt to in
| troduce the defence of the prisoner at Il wrong
time and in an improper manner. If they
| proposed to show 4 proyocation they must do
| il at another time.
The Court decided that the objection of the
| Common wealth was well made, and directed
| the witness TO proceed.
MR. HANNA CONTINUES UNDER DIFFICULTIES.
Mr. Hanna again took the stand, and Judge
! Ould then asked the question: What did you
mean when yon said in the first instance the
| article!
| the Southern Opinion on the Saturday pre-
| yious. would like here 70 make IN eXplana-
| ton.
The Court: Wait q moment, Mr.. Hanna.
Judge Guild: May not the witness make an
| eXplanationH
| The Court: Yes, he can 60 on and make his
| explanation.
Witness l wish to say that in any CONVEX
| sation We may have had no reference was
| made to the accused, but 10 the publica ton.
1t didn't refer personally to the accused Ut the
4 bar.
| Judge Ould Did the deceased mention the
name of the accused on Monday or Tuesday ?
Witness: No, sir.
Judge Ould: You say, Mr.. Hanna, that the
| conversation had reference TO publication
in the Southern OgintOR Of the previous Satur-
| day. What was the date OF that publication
Objected to, but obisc ton orerruled.
Witness: presume it was the 2lst Of No
! yember.
Judge Ould (handing the witness a copy Of
the Southern 0ptnton) Is that one OF the Issues
Of that datef
Mr.. Gumer object. Don'ttake it in your