The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-01-09

! shoe-Store OF Wipgo, Elicit Crump,
northeast corner OF Main and Tenth streets,
was attacked at that place by John Il. Poin-
dexter and borsewbipped. The alleged oi'
fence was some remark stated TO nave Deen
made by Curtis 10 Miss Isabel Cottrell while
he was serving her in his capacity OF shoe
clerk Two hours subsequently Curtis and
his friend, Mr.. Mcclure. sought Poindex-
fer az the latter's place of business, Twenty
| fourth and Main, and Curtis demanded ap
analogy. PoindeSter refused it. There
pnou Curtis struck him with stick repeat
edlv, and PoindcXter fired upon Curtis
several times, The wounds causing death.
on the fret trial there was huns-lury.
On the second verdict OF guilty OF voiun-
tarv mauslaughter and two years imprlson-
ment in the penitentiary was brought III.
That verdict Judge George l.. Christian re-
fused 10 set aside when asked, whereupon an
appeal was taken to the supreme Court.
THAT tribunal Yesterday. through Its pre-
sidenf, Judge Il. c. l.. Moncure, delivered
IFS unanimous opinion, document OF forty
three very closely-written lega'-cap pages,
which required an hour and three-quarterS
in the reading.
THE POINTS RAISED.
The first assignment OF error was that the
Hastings Court erred in overruling the petit
nal and each of the other wris OF UeniTe ia
c;ns issued on the second tlial. The Obiec-
lion 10 the first writ was that the list was
not made out according TO law. The mo-
? tjon OF the defence was to quash all the
! writs OF renire fdcidS subsequent to the
first on the ground that they commanded
the officers to summon citizens VINO reside
4" remote" from the place where the felony
was committed. Defence held that the
words "and who reside remote from the
place where the felony was committed" "
are not in that part OF the act OF the Gene
raj Assembly under which the said Wrlts
were issued, and that the insertion OF
, the said words rendered them fatally delec-
tive.
, There were various other irregularities
alleged as 10 the writS and returns
The Supreme Court held that Judge
Christian was right and the Wits anu re-
| turns were in proper form.
TIE HOUSEKEEPING AFFAIR.
The next assignment of error was "the
! admission BY the lower court OF evidence ol
: | the fact that prior difficulty had occurred
: between the petitioner and sald GURUS on
; the same morning on which the killing OF
; the latter by the former occurred, which
forms the subject OF the indictment, and foi
:. which latter alone your petitioner was le
. oallv on trial "-in other words the coupling
;: Of the cOwhiding affair with the attack made
y nv Curtis uDon PoindeXter at Chlldrey''
: factory.
l. In The consideration Of this point tht
: court reviewed the evidence quite fully.
:, The opinion said "The interval O
n time between the said occurrences was very
y short compared with their importance
~ ius, two hours. The distance between tht
- places where they respectively happened
was fourteen squares OF the city OF Ricli
mond The parties were perfect stranger
r. each other when the first occurrence tool
n place. Curtis seemed TO be wholly uncon
# scious of having given any just cause o
w offence in the matter for which the violen
nj assault and battery committed upon him b.
p. PoindeXter on the occasion was so com
in mitted."
m NO CHANCE FOR APOLOGY.
as "He was not called upon for an explains
Id ton or an apology in regard TO the matte
ar for which the said assault and battery [th
rs cowhiding1 was made. He bore il withOu
4 resistance and without a murmur Of CON
Dg nlaint. He even TOOK friendly leave Of To
le- perpetrator OF il, and offered to ap0logiZ
TO 10 the person Miss Cottrell] who seemed
fe. have taken offence ct something which b
ng was charged with having done or said 0
as some former occasion, though he by n
wv means admitted that he intended to Civ
ne any such offence.
he every soon after PoindeXter left til
is store Of Wingo, Elicit II Crump, after con
ias mitting the assault and battery aforesaid
~ Curtis became very much excited, an
ch went out to inquire who 1t was that ba
ID, done him so much violence, for be was
De- total stranger to PoindeXter.
10 "In short time he made the discover
and returned, and soon again went out III
he with his friend Mcclure went down 10 Il
ed Dlace OF business OF POndeXter 10 get fro
TO him an apology for the great wrong whi'
"a, he had done TO Curtis.
Ild THE SHOOTING.
ha "They carried no deadly weapon wi
w them. Neither of them was armed, exec
10 that Curtis carried with him stick a
u" parentv Of ordinary size, which they pr
cured in their walk to see PoindeXter Gu
=, tis demanded an apology Of PoindeXte
nj an and il IL had been accordingly given q
"n whole difficulty would doubtless ut on
cd have been settled. Certainly II Curtis Wou
Nv have teen satisfied with such settlemen
,;o as it seems he would have been, PondeXt
M, ought also TO have BEEN
"a - But the latter refused to apologize, an
~ the former had either 80 use his stick
~ striking PoindeXter, or else TO return as
came, without receiving any satisfactlo
g. Curtis advanced to use hisstick, when Poi
no dexter drew his pistol, which was seye
Wv shooter, aud threatened to Kill Curtis If Il
- latter strnel him with the stick The latt
M said that he was unarmed, and seemed
M doubt fhesitatcl whether he would strik
as But McGuire lEged him to strike, which
g., accordingly did, and the striking with Il
y" stick on the One side and firing with Il
pistol on the other continued uLtil Curt
2, had receiaed five wounds, one OF which W
IN mortal. Though ,toindeXter seems not
80 have been seriously hurt by the bpws
50, received ia tie conflict.
he "Now the first occurrence ftreSa
ms plainly led TO and WAS the cause of !tse Sc
n. ond. as was we'll understood by Poiade.
II tier, and evidence OF :tse former Was clear
- admissible evidence oG the trial OF Fol
in dexter for the homicide OF Curtis.
90 "The Hastings Court, therefore, did b.
20 err. as alleged, in the second assignment
n. error."
I'd AS TO SETTING ASIDE TIE VERDICT.
a. "The third and last assignment OF el
ror," SAYS the opinion, "was the refusal
j., the Court 10 set aside the verdict and gran
~ Q new trial.v This motion was based upo
" tseyeral gr0unds-as follows:
), First. Because the Court erroneously IL
"a mttcd us evidence to the jury the testmon
~ ~ OF V. s. Carlton and Of other witnesses cor
=. cerning an assault [the cowbidng at th
~ shoe-storel made upon deceased by the pr
n. soner, &c.