The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1879-11-10
DANVIIE.
rlsnCHGpncc 81 The Richmond Dispatch.

. .IlNIll HhtNtt bI AItS
NOVEMBER s, 1879.
4 singular case has been disposed OF
judge Aiken, CT the Hastings Court OF
rs city. this week. y. l.. Price, OF Chat.
IN. was tried in the HuSiingS Court OF the
aniy for the murder OF one cambridge
Burnett, and on the 25'h ultimo the jury
ought in this verdict: We. the jury,
nd the prisoner, Nathaniel Price, not
:uIry Of murder. as charged within the in.
cement. but guilty Of voluntary man.
Slaughter. As charged therein, and tiuc him
1 re hundred dollars" This verdict being
Entered upon the record, the Court entered
Eg following order: "And, therefore,
Proclamation being made, Is the man
fM is, and nothing further appearing
o. being alleged against the said prisoner,
+ i. considered by the Court that said Price
b. discharged OF this prosecution and go
hereof without day." On the third day
afterwards the Court annuled this order
and sentenced Price to The payment OF the
liae assessed against him by the jury, to-
mr:bcr with the costs OF the prosecution,
md directed also that lie be imprisoned in
T.. county, Jail for six months, and remain
81 prison afterwards till the fine and costs
/. paid Price was Immediately afterwards
rested, and thereupon applied to Judge
aiken sor writ OF haG2qS corpus. Judge
AIKEN took time TO consider the case. and
lien remanded the prisoner to the custody
4 the sheriff.
4 In discussing The application for the writ
q * Honor makes these points: First. That
& y had 10 decide upon the case without any
-ccedcnt 10 guide him. He could not find
70 The whole range Of textbooks and Iu-
.ciaI reports at his command a case in
Which an order OF discharge without day
Al, recorded upon verdict OF conviction
i d 4 misdcmcanor. Second. The jury mis-
q Ok their province in aScertaining the
8 mount OF the fine, but the Court might
81 NE adopted the finding OF the jury. The
d lrt, however, neither did this, nor did it
q, :er up n judgment for the tine upon
i verdict, but discharged the prison.
D. THIS order for his discharge was
~.al. Third. The order for the dis.
4 large OF The prisoner being illegal
B !td null, the prisoner had not passed
1t Of the jurisdiction of the Court, and the
8 a1,neut then, according to lazy, remained
pronounced and enforced. Its tracea-
4 BE to the very origin OF the common law
3 lot court may yacate or set aside errone-
w !HuHiututs during Tue tciu az "uieu
b icy are entered and render instead OF them
Arl As are required. Fourth. AS to the
s ia that the prisoner should have been pre-
81 nj when The sentence was pronounced, he
n *2g on trial for murder, the answer is
n IL he was also under prosecution for
-HieMcanor, and That The verdict was for
s -'4:meanor and capias to hear Judgment
q ", not necessary. II, however, an error
~ been committed by the courts in this
s. >ftcl, tia, could only be examined by an
81 IleiIate court. To discharge the prisoner
4ues INNS plea would be usurping the
'm0 o. t4a higher court.
81 Aeie> Tie last word about the election
u Ials county: The largest vote was given
a - mas been given since the presidential
A rcdon-about 1900; the msiority for the
3 >''fayers was about LOO; the colored
4 <yaoslcan Debt-Payer received SOC votes.
3 %'u now | lay down this pencil, and take
i ne have this morning the much-needed
f. ALPHA.