Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-12-02
must be scanned with the closes, scrutiny,

sk'nv 'uht rucn uOuDt ulu-t w trVNtu III
bis isyor, and that be Is entitled 10 an ac-
quitial.
Now, with tins simple statement OF the
law, and remembering that the accused
cannot be required to make any disproof OF
The charge made against him until the prose
cution has established hi. gull, beyond rea-
scnable doubt by proof of TIE crime anu
criminal agent, ask Is il proven to the ex'
clusion OF every reasonable doubt that The
accused is murderers This, repeat, l.
case Of circumstaniial evidence, depeuding
not upon the statement OF any eve witnes~
Of the occurrence, but depending upon
mere inferences 10 be drawn from the facts,
few in number, and, to say the least, not
closely connected.
No one who has not read the record or
seen the brief of the state can begin TO
appreciate the controlling influence which
the mere fact that the prisoner was The sup
posed seducer OF this girl must have ex-
erted over the jury upon the trial OF this
case. And the real difficulty in establish
ing that there Is fatal defect Of proof as TO
the cause Of the death OF the deceased Is
attributable, not 80 much 30 any incrimi-
natory evidence disclosed in the record. for
il l. certainly meagre and ineonclusiye a.
TO the fact that criminal intimacy having
been once established between the
prisoner and The deceased, the nafu-
raj impulse OF those not conyersant
with criusilal cases Is TO leap to the con-
clusiou fiat the alleged seducer must OF
necessity DC murderer, and 80 seems TO
me 10 be apparent that the fact that there Is
no necessary or inevitable connection be-
tween the alleged seduction aud death OF
tie deceased bas been overlooked. II must
be obvious TO the humblest understanding
that the proper function OF this court IS
not 10 pass upon the question of the abstract
luiH Of persons charged with otfences--for
that can be seen alone by the eye Of Omnis-
cence--but TO determine whether the legal
quiH Of such persons is established.
have not the time 10 90 into all the de-
tails Of evidence in this case IN order ~ de-
velop the train OF events which lead to this
poor girls death, and II ] had, ! would
doubt the wisdom Of doing so, as 1t could
only result IN casing. perhaps, undeSerNed
suspicion upon the living without furnish
ing conclusive evidences OF the certainty
Of my conjectures. shall, therefore, only
say that do not feel justified in saying. in
the face OF the testimony OF the medical
expert, that he medical facts are as con-
sisient rih suicide a. death from Ulo-
lence tIerted Jy another; that il is moi cs.
tabiished beyond doubt that she came 10
her death by violence. II is perfectly evi.
dent 10 my mind that undue importance
has been attached 10 the mere motive which
the prisoner is supposed 10 have had To de-
stroy the deceased. Indeed, il seems TO
have been made the hinge upon which ibis
case was made largely to turn in both courts,
while no consideration seems 10 have been
given 10 the powerful inducement this un-
fortunate girl had TO destroy herself. or to
her declarations that she was anxious To
die To my mind the motive she had to
destroy herself was at least equal 10 any
that the prisoner could have had 20 make
way with her. But suppose that IL be con-
ceded that the death OF the deceased was
caused hy another, still the evidence does
not even then establish beyond doubt that
the murderer was the accused. None Of
the tracks at the reservoir are shown 10
have been made by the prisoner. The
only Witnesses who testify with much
GiSiircinees 20 the character Of the
tracks left by the male person supposed
10 have been present at the time Of her
death testify, in substance, that the tracks
were those Of person wearing a coarse,
"JTOadJCiiCm shoe" or brOgdB," and the
prisoner. although his whereabouts during
the whole Of the 18Th Of March are well
known. Is not shown TO have worn such 4
shoe. n such had been the case It seems
10 me that il would have been easy for the
detective, who i shown 10 have been so
industrious in this case, TO have hunted ont
the evidence Of that fact. The main and,
indeed, the only circumstance which tends
to show that the accused was with the de-
ceased at the time OF her death Is The find
ing III indeed it was ever lost OF the key.
and t,ls j. certainly not inconsistent with
the hypothesis Of innocence.
Assuming, What il not positively proven,
that IL was his key, il may have been
droppcd there by the deceased. to whom
he may have loaned IT, or. u may be, that
il VA, the key which one Of the witnesses
thinks be saw on her bureau. IL j. not
shown to have been leit 10y any one in
licht, for nobody te,lities that such tracks
a. must inevitably have. been left by per-
son flying have been found. II | 90 10 tae
fullest extent which the evidence tends
positively 10 establish, and admit that the
min seen with the wOm1n by Dr. StrAt,os
on Reservoir street on the night OF the
18th Of March was the accused. he
nav vet have left her before She relchcd
the reservoir. The shawl on Dun,tan's
fence, in my opinion, was never left there
hy person who had 1ifeady pcrpctrlted
the crime Of murder. 70 my mind il seems
improbable that the perpctratOr OF such =
crIme would have been carrying around
with him and distributing thus the eyl-
denco> OF his guilt. II !, certainly far
! more reasonable 4 suppose That these artl-
ciCS. v hch seem 10 have been dropped at
different places. were left by a woman
crazed by trouble and anXiou, to >eekwhat
she iool,hly regarded as relief in death.
II is highly probable that this poor girl
came TO Richmond, after having first com
municatcd her purpose 70 the accused, 10
make her arrangements for getting rid OF
the child with which she was pregnant, or
TO make arrangements for lying in; anu
being lOiled in her efforts, sought relief in
the waters OF the reservoir. Indeed, II we
must indulge in conjecture, the mere ap.
peaTance Of scuille may have been
partly made bv one attempting to lciU,hOtd
Tie deceased from drowning herself, A.
well n 10y one endeayOring to throw her
into tie reservoir. 1nany respect In which
we mlv contemplate The fcW asccr;ained
facts in this case, they are certainly not alb
.oluicly inconsistent with the innocence OF
the accused of the crime OF murder. | am.
therefore, constrained 10 declare that !
think the prisoner !, clearly entitled u a
new trial on each Of three grounds which |
have indicated.
II time served could point t. many
cases in which this and other courts have
taken Ike view OF cases where the evil
dence was stronger than II Is here. AZ II
i, however, can only point to Grason's,
6 Graft. AID smiths case, in u Graft, and
10 remarks OF Moncure, p, in Johns ms
case. % Graft, in commenting on Smiths
case.
The Opinion Of the Court.
The Cluyerius ease was decided by the
supreme Court OF Appeals on May q, 1856.
when Judges Lewis, FauntlerOy, Lacy, and
Richardson concurred in affirming the
Judgment Of the Hastings Court OF Rich
mend. Judge Hinton dis,enied. Judge
Fauntleroy delivered the opinion, which.
As an entirety. was cOncurred in only by
Judge Lewis while Judges Lacy and
Richardson concurred IN the results. Judge
Lacy has since that time filed his own
opinion.
This dissenting opinion Of Judge Hinton
IN nowise alters the status Of the case. The
conviction Of the prisoner stands Ss before.
Judge Hinton would have prepared and
liled his opinion long ago, but was pre-
vented from so doing by sprainiDg his right
wrist. which prevented hin from Using a
pen with ease.
The Statement.
The prisoner Is at work on hls statement
for The Governor. 1t will realflrm hl' de-
claraiion made soon after he was arrested.
that be was at Mozart Hall on the night OF
the death OF Lillian Madison. and the am
ID - 4 .....l A. AE...I.i AL