Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-04-01
LILLIAN MADISON.
HER RIGHTS AND WRONGS BEFORE
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS.
Arguments Yesterday by Attorney-3en'
eral Ayers and Hon..A. Brown
Evans.

CluveYius, resumed his argument on |
I" the torn note" contending that no
thing in the record showed where the |
paper was between the time that Dod- |
son delivered it to Wren and Wren's |
delivery of it to the representatives OF
the Commonwealth.
Here. Mr.. Pollard claimed, was a
gap in the testimony.
Judge Hinton questioned Mr.. Pol
lard as to dates, and it seemed that
while the note was surrendered into
wren's hands on Monday or Tuesday,
it did not appear when it was turned
over to the Police Justice /; but it is adj
mitted that the Justice saw the paper
the day it was found.
JUSTICE TO JUDGE ATKINS.
Mr.. Pollard corrected himself and did
justice to Judge Atkins by saying that
after the Judge recalled Dedson and Hunt
the Judge said that while he had doubted
the admiSSibility of the note before, he
nor had no doubts, &c.
Judge Lewis interrupted Mr.. Poll
lard to inquire if the Judge did not say
that the note had been identified.
Mr.. Pollard answered, " Yes" he
did. and that was one of the grounds of
objection here--that the Judge under
took to determine question which was
referable to the jury.
The eAtt0rucy-Gcucrai.
Mr.. Ayers. without an Introductory
word. proceeded to the discussion OF
the cause, beginning with the point
raised by prisoners counsel that the
action of the lower court in pushing
back the June term so that the May
term might run into June was illegal.
lie thought the Court had properly ex-
ercised its authority; the word
"month meant a judicial month, not
a calendar month, and he contended
that the statute on this point does ap-
ply to the corporation courts.
Next Mr.. Ayers took up the point
about Juror Larke. He thought the
construction of the law by prisoners
counsel unreasonable. Larke was over
sixty. lie claimed his exemption on
that account and he had the right, the
Attorney General said, to discharge
without the assent Of accused.
REASONABLE RULE.
The rule prescribed by the General
Assembly is reasonable, as men of
sixty years of age are usually not able
to bear the fatigues Of long and wearl-
some trial.
In addition to this claim OF exemption
it was proved by two witnesses that
Larke had said that he would not hang
man on circumstantial evidence.
The manner Of the Juror could not be
brought here" and Mr.. Ayers con-
tended that "every presumption must
be in favor Of the trial court below. 1t
must appear plainly to this court that
this discretion vested in the lower court
has been unwisely exercised, or it will
not interfere"
CIGAR BET.
As to Goode, who had bantered a
man for bet of fifty cigars that the
prisoner would not be convicted"
and, when examined upon his roir DIRE,
/ had not disclosed the fact-Mr. Ayers
declared that he would leave that ques-
ton with confidence that this court
would uphold the lower one. If juror
had the right to bet fifty cigars who
would set the limit to his betting:
THE VISIT TO THE JAIL.
Next Mr.. Ayers discussed that bill
of exception which deals with alleged
leading questions propounded by the
attorney for the Commonwealth to Mr..
A. w. Archer, clerk of the Exchange,
relative to a visit Archer made to the
Jail, where he identified prisoner as the
man who in January had come to the
hotel to see "Miss F. l.. Merton"
mo fact was suggested no particu-
lar answer was indicated by the ques-
tions of the Commonwealth's Attor-
ney, said Mr.. Ayers. The questions
were proper and within the rule of law.
CURTIS LETTER.
Next he took up the Laura Curtis
letter.
Miss Laura Curtis is an estimable
young lady of Richmond. 1t is dread
full thing that her name is constantly
up in this case. She was schoOlmate
of Llllian's at the Bruington Academy.
Lillian knew that she lived in Rich
mond. When Lillian was devising a
strategem to get to Richmond i'll
March, Lillian wrote herself (Lillianl a
letter signed Laura Curtis
Laura Curtis" " invited Lillian to
come to Richmond and 20 with I" Miss
| Curtis's" aunt to Old Point. Lillian
read this forged letter TO her employer,
Mrs. Dickinson. 1t thoroughly de-
cei,ed the old lady, and she permitted
Lillian to come to Richmond.
In the court below the Common
wealth contended that the letter was
ruse concocted by Cluyenus, and they
introduced the letter to show under
what circumstances Lillian left her
home as shedding light upon her de-
| parture.
A THICK LETTER.
The Attorney-General thought the
court below was right in admitting this
letter. and be referred to the fact that
after it was introduced the prisoners
counsel caused to be introduced the
original draft Of the letter-that also
having been found in the deceased's
trunk-defence intending to prove that
Cluverius did not write or cause to be
written the Laura Curtis letter, but
that it was wholly the work Of de-
ceased.
Mr.. Ayers argued this point at con-
siderable length. lie quoted many au-
thorities and used many illustrations to
demonstrate that the letter was part
of the res geste. And he insisted that
the evidence did show that but few
DAY s before deceased received this Laura
Curtis letter CluveriuS had written her
a thick letter and mailed it down the
country. 1t was said to have been
mailed at Richmond; but the envelope
was not found. Why was it destroyed?
FROM THE BENCH.
I.1oo Hinton Uo- Iaoc .fto~ th.t