Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1885-05-27
Trial of ThOs. J. Cluverius Continued.
CHARGED WITH THE MURDER OF FANNIE
LILLIAN MADISON.
TurcnAv MAY 18th.

o'clock Tuesday morning. There were Du
few spectators outside the bar, and CT
small number within the railing % 9ne
Aylett, of the prosecution, asked thaS tn
jury be sent out of the courtroom Inprdel
that the question of the admissibilty Q Ger
tain testimony might be argued. Inc de
tense argued in opposition to permitting The
introduction by the prosecution OF Que q tht
letters known as the 'Curtis letter, WhIof
is said to be forgery, and which, = l!
claimed, was addressed by Cluverius. Iht
letter was an invitation or a request IRON q
lady of this city to Miss Madison to come t
Richmond for the purpose of accompanying
an invalid to Old Point Comfort. The argU
ment occupied nearly two hours, and at 1t:
conclusion the court said it would examine
the authorities, and that in the meantime
the case could go on in some other braDch
The jury was then recalled, and Mrs. j, B
Dickinson was again placed in the wi1s~s.7
chair. she testified that she had received
two postal cards from Lillian after the lat
ter had left her house. Both were dated
March IS. She burned them before sht
heard of Lillian's death, but could give the
substance of their contents. The defense
objected to the witness giving the contents
and the prosecution did not press the mat
ter. Lillian left the witnesses house OF
January and returned on the Sth, but wit
ness did not know where she had been. Sht
thought the trunk exhibited in court was
Lillian's.
Upon cross examination witness said that
Lillian visited her Cousins family, who
lived in the neighborhood, and other familie!
near her home. Lillian had lady friend
named Miss Kenny, who had a grown broth
er. A Miss Williams and her brother came
to the witnesses house to see Lillian. The
deceased at times seemed to be depressed il
spirits and troubled, but witness never ask
ed why she was SO. She was never visited
by any gentlemen outside the immediate
neighborhood. Lillian's demeanor while at
witness's house was faultless. She was al
ways kind, amiable and gentle, and always
doing little acts of kindness to contribute to
witnesses happiness. She did not consider
Lillian brave woman.
The prosecution here sought to put in evi-
dence the bundle of clothing found in the
river and the other articles found The de-
fense objected to the introduction of any
thing except the clothing found on the per-
son of the deceased ard the glove found on
the reservoir embankment. The objection
was overruled and the defense excepted
John l.. Oliver, county jailor of King and
Queen, testified that acting under search
warrant, about two weeks ago he had
searched the house of Mrs. Tunstall, the
prisoners aunt, and there found an over
coat and hat which the prisoners mother
said belonged to 'rommie," meaning her
son.
On cross examination witness said he was
accompanied by three officers from Rich
mond. Mrs. Cluverius was the only white
person at the house. She seemed agitated
when the warrant was read to her, and told
a colored girl to go after some one, but one
of the officers stepped the girl.
Emmett richardson, OF King and Queen
county, testified that about March 10 or 12
he came to Richmond with Cluverius, and
that he then wore light fall overcoat and
low slouch hat. TO the best of his knowl-
edge and belief the overcoat and hat were
the same as worn by the prisoner at that
time. Upon their arrival in Richsconh he
went with the prisoner to Davis's HUtel,
where Cluverius left his overshoes.
James NJ. Guthrie, assistant postmaster
at Braes, King and Queen county, had re-
ceived letters to be mailed, which, 20 the
best of his knowledge and belief, were adj
dressed in the prisoners handwriting. He
was sure that some of them were addressed
to "Miss Fannie Lillian Madison" Mill
boro' Springs, Bath county, Va. The last
letter was mailed four or five days before it
was reported that the prisoner had gone to
Richmond.
1t appeared during Guthrie's testimony
that private examination of the witness
had taken place before by counsel fer the
prosecution, and that his answers under
oath did not conform to all that seemed to
be expected. The witness since his arrival
in Richmond has roomed for time with
VIM. CluveriuS, a brother of the prisoner,
and also with Messrs. Pollard and Evans, OF
counsel for the defense. He stated that
there had been unkind feelings between
himself and the prisoner for about six
months.
Willie Dickinson, about IA years old, a
nephew of Mrs. Dickinson, testified that he
lived with his aunt. He remembered get
ting letter at the postoflice In March last
for Miss Lillian, the day before she lett for
Richmond. Witness said he was familiar
with the writing on the letter. He was
shown some of the letters found in LilIian's
trunk, and he said he had seen several of
them before The defense here interrupt
Ou Wioh uhO oVheSLlCdU tudU llt l6IEydECV vi
this letter testimony was now under the
consideration Of the court and that every
thing leading UP to it should be excluded.
Ii 1T did not lead up to the main question
it was worthless. The witness was put
aside for the present.
Judge John Is. Foster, of the King and
Queen County Court, testified that he
knew the prisoner as practitioner iu his
court. He knew his overcoat, and had
seen his watch key. The key was shown
him, and he said it bore a general resem-
blance to the one he had seen the prisoner
wear, but he was not positive that it was
the one.
At 2 o'clock the court adjourned until
ednesday so as to take them to examine
the authorities on the questions upon which
decision had been reserved, and to give
counsel for the defense an opportunity to
examine the trunk and the bag of cloth
ing.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 21sr.
In the Cluverius trial this morning the
court ruled that it would exclude the evi-
dence of Mrs. Dickinson and little Willie
Dickinson as to the superscriptlon on the
envelope containing the letter received by
Lillian, in which she was asked to come to
Richmond, on the ground that the witnesses
were not experts. The court also ruled chat
the letter itself could be admitted as tssti
mony, but not as an independent fact apart
from the visit to Richmond and that the
contents of the postal cards received by Mrs.
Dickinson on March 18th, which she had
burned, could not be taken as evidence
There was some discussion over admitting
the dates of the postal cards, the defense
holding that there was no rule known bv
which the cards could be admitted. They
were not part of the res gest@ of the case.
The prosecution stated what it hoped "a