Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-05-07
Exhaustive Rlyifw Of the Evidence Law,
and authorities
The PRISONER LEARNS HIS PATE.
He Expresses Surprise, but Takes it Very
Calmly, &C., &C.

March I3. 1855. at 2 o'clock a. NJ, Miss
Fannie Lillian Madison arrived In this city
from Bath county and went TO the Ameri-
can Hotel, where she registered as Miss
FL. Merton" Next morning her dead body
was found ia the Old city reservoir. a
short distance west OF Hollywood ceme-
icry. ON the 18th. near Little Plymouth.
In the county Of King and Queen, her first
cousin. +. j. Cluverlus tkla'veers), was ar
rested charged with the murder OF de-
ceased. He waived sn examination before
The Police Justice here, was indicted I'm
April. and was brought to trial In the Hust.
ings Court OF Richmond a, the May term.
on tbe 4ih day OF June the jury brought
IN verdict Of guilty
Counsel for defence made the usual mo-
uops 10 set aside the verdict In arrest OF
Judgment, SC. &C. Failing in ali these,
they secured writ OF error from the Su-
nrcmc Court OF Appeals. March 20. 1855,
ile hearing Of the case was commenced.
The counsel who had appeared in the lower
court Messrs. G. V. Meredith and ". X.
Ayett for The Commonwealth Mtssrs.
". w. and b. +. CTump, A. Brown Evans,
and II. X. Pollard for Irisoner-toZetner
win Attorney General ters. Whose duty
10 Is To Tepr, sent the Commonwealth in oil
argued the points raised. occupying the
whole OF that week.
IA wasapnouuced that the decision OF the
Supreme Court would be given yesterday.
At llh--ihe hOuI when the court mcets-
the courtroom WAS crowded, the ngloriiy
Of thespoctR'0r Ne'Ig members OF The bar.
Al The counsel 10 he case were present eN-
cept Messrs. aus. Pollard, aud Ayletf,
wro 1--we down ne country. Judge Drump
eat 10 the left uf The bencl and near the
bar. BE ooh eG serious. but though he lis
tened to cNeT9 y liable or the opinion, ana
realized thRL prop after prop was being
knocked fion under his case. he never al
tered in express iOn In the least.
Judge Richardson was sick and unable To
attend court. All the other judges were In
their tesis-Judges Lewis, Lacy, Faunte-
roy. and Hinton.
Judge Lewis tho president of the court.
habded down. without reading. decisions IN
several matters. and then announced that
Judge FauntlerOy would read the opinion
of the court iu the case Of Cluyerius against
The Commonwealth" IL took two hours 10
read the opinion. but by the time the ques-
ton Of tho torn note ~ was reached IL was
quite apparent That the decision was al
Ncrse TO the prisoner. aud the special cor
respondents hurried OF To telegraph the
fact and the Dispatch was 'phoued To- bul-
leiin a e news. which 10 did instantly. and
the IN formation soon spread over the city.
IN the opinion as pronounced by Judge
FauntlciOy Judge Lewis cOncurreu. Judge
Lacy coUcurTcd In the results, but not IN
The opiniOp. Judge Lewis slated that Judge
Kichaldson had requested him 20 say that
lie coucuIred In the rtsults. and would mere
after write out his views. Judge Hinton
disstnted. saving That In his Judgment The
cofJus dciicfi was not established with the
LEGAL certainty that ought 10 be required
before mGn is held guilty OF murder IN
the first degree. lie thought, also. that the
Curtis letter was utterly ipadmissible as
evidence In any respect, ana either ground
would, in his opinion, justify "A reversal OF
tH ftr. 10 az lnWgr
granting OF "a new tIial.
THE OPINION.
This is writ OF error 10 a judgment Of the
Hastings Court Of the city OF hichmond,
rendered on the 10Th day OF June, 1883,
against Thomas j. Cluverius. the plalntlH
IN error. The record shows that he, the
said tluVerius, was indicted. tried: convict
ed. and sentenced To be hanged for the
murder OF Fannie Lillian Madison on the
ISth day OF March. lss5. within the guris-
dicliOu OF the said Hastings Court OF the
city OF Richmond.
The Volumlnous record IN the case pre-
sents TO the careful. patient, and anxious
scrutiny OF this court the determl.
nation Of the legality and justice OF
the proceedings IN tue case III the
trial court-that IL. the question. both
whether the Commonwealth produced
upon the trial before the jury evidence
competent and sufficient to warrant the
verdict OF the jury: aud whether the,prl-
soner from the inception TO the end OF his
trial, has had the benefit OF all the
sanctions and safeguards thrown around
him. and, indeed, around the lives and
the liberties OF all her citizens, by the crinli-
nal jurisprudence OF the state.
In this connection II Is appropriate 10 re-
mark the fact, that from the beginning 10
the end OF the protracted and painful trial
OF tins case I'm the said Hastings Court, eX-
tending through thirty days. and en-
braeing so many intricate questions OF law
and fact. There are no exceptions nled.
either 10 the Instructions given by the Court
TO the jury. or TO the conduct Of the jury, or
the officers OF the court.
lhe record shows tnat during the said
trial eight bills OF exceptions TO The
rulings Of the Court were taken by the prl-
soner: and. also. that a motion in arrest OF
Judgment for ertos aRliest on the record
was made by the pris&her and overruled
by the Court aud thefkaid rulings OF the
Court, as shown In the several bills OF eX-
ception. and its ruling upon his motion In
arrest OF Judgment. are assigned as errors.
Before we proceed 10 consider these as
Shipments OF error and the grounds OF error
sssigned IN the record. We must consider
the Quest ion raised and relied on here by
the learned counsel for the prisoner In their
printed and oral argument at the bsr OF
this court-viz., that the Hustings Court
had no authority 90 hold Its session. and
hence had no jurisdiction over this case at
the time The verdict was rendered and sem
tence pronounced"
The record shows that the accused was
srrnigned on the 5ih day OF May. 1885. and
Mt the same session OF the court, continued
by adjournment from day 10 day. the case
was submitted TO the jury on the 4th day ot
June. ON which day they found the accused
9Wdty.
Question Of Jurisdicfion.
II is insisted by the learned counsel for
the prisoner "that the regular monthly
term OF the Hastings Court for the month OF
May commenced on Monday the sth daN
OF Nay and expired on SATURDAY the sotn
day OF May the following Monday being the
LIST day OF June: and consequently tnstai
proceedings thereafter had are null apd
void" Ny Article W., section Ia OF tne
Constitution OF Virginia. the judges OF tho
corporation or hustings courts are provided
for" who shall bold "A corporation or must
ings court OF said city or town as often and
ts many days In each mouth as may be pre-
kcreed by law" by the 26th section OF
chapter i54 OF the Code OF 1878 IL Is pro-
vided that there shall be a term OF the
raid Hastings Court (of the city of Rich
mondl for each month In the year except the
nonth OF August commencing on the INT
monday In the month and continuing So
dong "a ne business before the court may
Ietre.' BY the seth section OF this chapter
III provided: The judge OF every such
corporation court may from time TO time
change the day for the commencement of
the terms thereof. or any OF them" &c. The
Judge OF the Hustinrs Court entered an
order IN ihis cause postponing the COM
mencemept OF the June term OF the court
from the first Monday 10 the fosith Mon.
day. and then continued the MAJ term by
adjournment from day TO day, after the
nfst Monday Ia June. so long as the bnsl-
nets before the court required
In Cahoon's case. 2ist Graft. this court
In constituting the l4th section OF the sixth
Article OF the Constitution Of Virginia,
says: "The words as maay days In
each month as may be prescribed by law,
In that section do not refer 10 the calendar
month In which q term may commence,
but 10 fhe Judicial month, commencing from
the day IN one calendar month and contin.
uing 10 the day In the next calendar month
nxed By law for the commencement OF the
monthly term OF the court" The record
shows that the monthly term OF the June
term was changed. by the legal order OF the
Judge. 70 begin on the fourth Monday In
stead OF the first Monday In June: and we
are OF opinion that he had the legal right.
and was in duty bound 10 continue the
4a{ term from day 10 day into the month
q june 70 long e. the business before the
court required. and ~, In this ease the re.
cora shows, was indispsnsabiy requisite for