Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-12-04
TWO HEAVY HITS.
JUDGE ATKINS AND MR.. MEREDITH on
THE cLuvERIUs CASE.
no Reason Why the Law Should hot DO
Allowed to Take Its Course.
&C., &C., &c.

&C., &C., &c.
In the following correspondence Gov
cruor Lee asks The Hon. Taomas s. Afk'ns'
| judge Of the Hu,tings Court Of Richmond,
and Charlea V. Meredith, Esq, who acted
| as Commonwealth Attorney III tie prose
cuiion Of Cluyerius, what they have to say
q TO extending Executive clemency to the
prisoner, and they reply that they know OF
no reason why the law should not be al
| lowed TO take its course:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGISA,
GOVERNORS OFFICE,
RICHMOND, VA, December 2, 1856. )
Hon. Thomas s. atkins, JadJe Of ht
Hastings Court:
Ny Dear Sir,--The Governor directs me
| TO say that petitions aud other papers for
| the exercise Of Executive clemency. in the
| case of Thomas j. Cluverius have beeu
| duly received, and. in accordance with his
custom in such cases, he directs me TO AK
| II YOU Ia the Judge before whom the case
was itied) have any views or rccommenda-
| tons TO offer In reference to this case now
| before him.
j am, very respectfully. your obedient
servant, j. t.. WALLER, Secretlry.
TrsTITce COURT CITY or R1CHvOSD,
RICHMOND, VA, December 8, 1886.
To Ills Eycetlency Etzhugh Lee, Governor
If Virginia:
Sir,-I have the honor to acknowledge
the receipt OF your communication OF thr
| Cd instant. asking il ] have any views OF
recommendations To offer In reference To
the case Of Thomas J. Ciuyerius, now be
fore YOU for Executive clemency.
10 reply have TO say tblt on the 10Th
day OF June, 1885, after overruling \ mo-
tion for a new trial, and when passing SEN
tence upon the prisoner, made Use OF the
following language: "YOu h6ve hid a
fai., and / may say, a liberal trial; and
finally the jury in the faithful discharge OF
their duty have pronounced you guilty,
and that verdict has been approved by the
Court.v Strengthened by the decision OF
the supreme Court of Appeals OF Nirglnia,
entertain now the opinion then ex-
pressed, and know OF no reason why the
sentence OF the Court should not be car
red out.
With great respect, your obedient ser
want, THOMAS 5. ATKINS,
Judge, 81.
A like letter was addressed 10 Mr.. Mere
diih, and he replied:
10 His ExceLIency Fitzhugh Lee, GOUernor,
DC.
Dear Sir,-I am in receipt OF the note Of
YOUR secretary, Mr. j. T.. Waller, informing
me Of the fling OF the petitions aud other
papers in the case OF T. J. Cluyerius, and
asking me, a. one OF the counsel who prose-
cuted the cqse in the IIusiings Court.
whether / have "aDy views or recon.
mendations 10 offer"
have not had time to consult with Colo
mel William X. Aylctt, with whom ! was
associated in the lower court. But as
know his views about the case so thoroughly
think | may say that he will not dissent
from those | sball express.
| am informed that one Of the said pot-
tons prays for his absolute pardon, and The
other for commutaliOn o. sentence TO ltn-
prisonment for life.
can imagine no reason that can justify
snv one in signing petition for absolute
PARDON, unless il be that the party so sign
mo has CONSCIENTIOUS scruples against the
inAction OF capital punishment. Enter
tanning no such principle myself ! cannot
think for one moment OF Joining in such
request.
As TO the other petition, | can conceive
Of no reason why il should be granted As
a matter OF choice ! should prefer TO sign
the Other petition to signing Inns latter one.
IL the evidence did not justify the verdi t
given, the prisoner is entitled to absolute
freedom, not TO imprisonment for life. All
must agree that il he was proved guilty oi
the crime charged, the seyerest penalty Of
the law should be inflicted. II he commit
l,n A
and unprotected woman; TINT woman hi
cousin and loving associate; that W)m III
hcarlngh!s unborn and bastard child. Un-
der such revolving circumstances there Is
nrcsenttd no opportunity for the exhibit
tion Of sentimentality, much les Of proper
pity or meriled mercy. II done, it was
cold-blooded and hPinOuS deed.
The simple question is, Wa he proved 10
have been guilty OF the crime with which
he was charged? He had able and earnest
counsel: he had ample time within which 10
prepare his defence; he had a fair and, !
am justified in saying, liberal trial. Yet
lie was convicted.
He appealed. His c1se was fully andably
argued. Yet the Court Of Appeals. bg .
vote Of four to one. affirmed the judgment
of the lower court. His earnest counsel,
dcoming the opinion Of the latter court er-
ronoous, asked for arehtaring. Their able
argument therefor was duly considered. Yet
The Court Of Appeals, again 10y the same
vote, held that by the law and the cyIdcnct IS
presented the prisoner deserved the pnn-
i,hment that had been pronounced against
him.
Under such circumstances any one, be-
fore making the assertion that The evidence
did not warrant the verdict, should Gilt
gently and laDOriOusly study the volunl-
nous record in thi> Gaze. or course every
one is entitled 60 indulge, If he wishes, IN
strcet.talk or fre-side chat. But upon 20
crave an issue a. is nov before your Excel
lcpcy | submit that such expression, of
opipion are not worthy OF being compared
with TIC verdict II am impartial iuTY-Wiih
the opinion Of a fair, intelligent. aud iihe-
ra'.m.nOcd trial.judge--n iih the iudgm nt
Of the able and Just judges Of the court oi
last resort.
As sample Of such wise opinions | may
refer 10 the statement that has been made
that The jury should have rendered YER
diet Of murder in tie second degree. J
have simply to say that person who would
make such a statement would be totally
ignorant OF what he would he talking about.
No court in the Commonwealth could have
sustained such n verdict. The deed was
either a deliberate murder or there was no
crime. A man who lifts a woman over a
fence and throws her into the water,
wherein she Is drowned, cannot be con-
yicted OF murder IN the second degree.
But since the appearance Of the morning
papers it may be claimed that the request
for Communication Is strengthened by tue
opinion OF the dissenting judge. do not
think SO; and in reply 10 your letter
deem il my doty to notice that opinion.
In reading the opinion OF Judge Hinton
every one who remembered the views OF
his four brother judges must have been
surprised to find therein such an express
sion as the following: at must be per
iectly apparent TO every unpreiudiced mind
that Larke was competent inror"; or
such an expression as this: "Now these
are the authorities relied on to sustain the
admission OF this letter, and yet it must be
apparent 10 every dispassionate mind that
they not only fail to justify its admission,
but, by necessary implication, forbid IT,
Are not the minds OF his brother judges
as unprejudiced," as "dispassionatc," ~
his own? Such expressions under the CIR
cumstances are, 10 say the least, unfortu
Dste. The Use OF them can only be eX-
planned by the fact that his opinion wa. pub
lished without lis ever having been sub
rniited to his brother judges in conference.
OF course have nothing TO do with
matter Of judicial courtesy. refer 10 the
above expressions 10 show that when
writing his opinion Judge Hutton was not
"dispassonate," in one sense OF the word.
I,, hi. n,,,ntcy IudOe Hinton finds fhe