Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-05-07

80 IfF once more huI ttfluts ~ ftIlN ~
Dickinson's remark that Il was a riRht long W =
for her alone. .Corsip Tomrnie wrute me he ~,s,'
meet me IN R,ehmond and the neyt Sl1ro, NOR r'i
meet me $: and. when she returned On Janltfy
sih, Va reply 10 Mrs Diekinsan'. qsestion, . nl.-
Idle. eid any one r nee, yos @ e 70 IL enn,enond
and bscBshf ire back; That silc .e.urncd 20 sii
county on ue evening of the 7tb; ,h1t on
the 9Th Il January she vas at the TX
charge Hoicl. in Gieilmond. rsrisfcrei "a
her own handwriting. under the mans OF :. MI
'. I. Merton aud occupying Rom SO us.
~ came intr The Exchange Hotel on The morn
Ing of ihe 9th. and ,Ikef up TO the clers !
counter. and. running bis hnzer down the u ~.
MhxF. T.. Mer on. c. and asked II shls lady !.
In; fiiat he pfiso-er was IN the hotel sev.,'
iimcs during the day In conversation VITA tl
dOceased. who h1d Tegisiercsi herself as" hi,s
z. Meftou.H aud sho was the orcJpani Of ROOM
&c: that he loft th" hotel with nor ihat ev nnH
and bat she dd not return tl,li uiglt AZ an ~na
not until Tire nexf morning tthe Ithl' "hen see
shortly afterwards went away
The Commonwealth offered 10 INTRODUCES
the 'eiter after proving that 10 was the on
received by the deceased on March 1oth
from the post. Office. lis INTRODUCTION wa
objected TO by the prisoner. The Couri
took time 10 consider: but before the Court
Iassed upon its Introduction the prisoners
counsel ssked the witness, Mrs. Dickinson
what was the date that on have men
toned being the day on which this letter
about which there has been 80 much argu-
ment, and which was offered 10 you for
Identification, was received, and whicn
she exhibited ss reason for her coming TO
Richmond ?'; The witness answered,
march 10Th" afterwards the Common
wealth pressed the point-thus asserted and
brought out in evidence by the defence
that the letter was the inducement OF her
coming 10 Rich mond. and fully proved that
she asserted that the contents OF the letter
were The &C euse Of her coming TO Richmond
ON March 18th. and that she exhibited the
letter and read us contents 10 Mrs. iicktD-
son as such inducement, and asked what
she should do: and, upon Mrs Dicklnsous
consentDg 10 her coming. determined 10
come and did come. starting of TO come the
next morning.
The evidence having established that the
deceased vas living in Bath county. at Mrs.
DCkinEon's as a teacher and that she leit
there on March l2fh for Richmond. assign
ing as the reason for her leaving the con-
tents OF a letter at the time that she eX-
hiblteo and read the tame, and having es
tabiished that she did come to Richmond,
and was found dead here early on the morn
ing ofthe l4th, under circumsia ncesand sur
roundings which powerfully, IL not. indeed.
pa lpably. Indicated that she had been mur-
deied. the letter was legitimate proof, n
Iait OF the res gcsfP. or OF those acts-yer-
hal, or written. or done-which stand In
" ca usal relation " 10 the crime. II was Ia
ayoWed hinge and preps ration for her COM
act OF coming; IL "cbaracterizes her act ot
going" a. d II was one Of the immediate
accompaniment" OF The act. she having
declared IL as her reason for gong ana ac'
tuslly started 10 go as soon asshe possibly
could the next morning 10 Richmond
where she arrived aud registered at the
American Hotel about 3 A. VI. on the morn
Ing Of the 18Th March, under the same
assumed nsme OF Miss r. l.. Merton" aud
wesa~Igned to Room 2l.' At about he.
nd a u n that fav
March 18TH. while the deceased who was
thus registered and assigned 10 Room
2l at the American Hotel, under the
name of Miss +. l.. Merton, Virginia, y
wss eating her breakfast n letter or
note was brought to the American Hotel
10y colored boy and received by the
clerk, Joseph II. DOdsOn, and was given
by him Immediately 10 the Office -man.
hunter Hunt, to take To Room 81,
which Hunt did deliver 10 the lady in z
whom he found eating her Dreakfasp, and
asked her II there Was any answer. She
gave him pn answer IN n sealed cnVeloDc
d anding waiting In the hall AT her doJr
Nhile she wrote ~ addressed 10 IT. j.
OuyeriUs," which Hurt took 10 the Office
0 nd gave 10 the colOred boy who hal
/ rCught the note or letter TO the hotel AMI
given 10 the clerk, and which the CLERK hal
cent 10 the occupant Of Room Fl. The con-
tents OF the note thus address To T. J.
Cuyerlus By the lady In Room FL respDn-
Just ieceiyed was:
q will be there az soon as possible, so DO
wait for me-
And tits IN proof By many witnesses that
she, having soon thereafter left the hotel,
was seen with the prisoner on the bridge
leading 10 Ieile Isle and In The workshops
on Belle Isle, and was heard tO accost him
in reply 10 something that he had said TO
her Why, Cousin Tommie!'
This narrative OF so much OF the tranSac-
tion between the deceased and the prisoner
which followed in immediate sequence To
and consequence OF her reception OF the
4" Curtis letter" in Bath on March 10th.
and VI her showing IL and reading 1t TO Mrs.
dickinson ss her reason for her coming the
LeXt day (lbOugh she missed the train on
lie lith) To Richmond. where she ~ IA
close communication with the prisoner on
tie next morning after her arrival In the
night and In different parts OF the city with
him-who visits her Rt the American Ho-
lei. registered by the same assumed name
which she and be had both used on Prev
Gus occasions Of clandesiine neeting-is
given 10 show the connection OF the prisoner
Vitn the Curtis letter: even in anticipation
OF the subsequent evidence. which proves
his instigatiOn Of and privity with 1t as q
second deception pract!ced upon Mrs. DICK
inson, and as the means and cause OF gel
ting the girl to leave her home in Bath and
TO come 10 Richmond. Wharton Law Of
Evidence, section 25e, says: The area or
events covered by the term res Destd, de-
pends upon the circumstances Of each PAL
iicular case In section 26l the aatnor
saysb
Yet again must n te remembered that con
tinuoLsntss is not always 10 De measured by time.
a uau.aciion Ia which parties are ao.orb"d may
last for wtCks su as 10 make, a. has Just ecu sali
vhat j. SAID and done N connection Win IL pirt
of the res Gesf0. &c, &e; that, " there be coI'
al = months interval. iorm part ~ the res ges'9
"It l. in any view clear That declarations which
ara the immediate accOInpanlnents Of ~ act
are admissible A. parts Of tie res gesfe, reinem-
bering That immediSienoss y tcstei by Close.
noss.-not Of tine. but by causal rclatiOn-Is jusi
explained. Ittd., section 262.
" " hen an act - done Ia which Us necessary
or important Ia ascIibc a character. motive or
object. what wus said by the actor Al The
lime. from which the character. moiiye' or cause
nay be COLLECTED. IS Iart OF we re-
0t6iU-N O. bal acts-and may be given In evidence.
wlci her the ACTOR lie or be not party 10 the suit
tGntnlt.f on evidence. 10th oduion, Vol. l..
sectlon los. Note u. sse also Taylor ON Evl-
Ccucf. Vol. ! , section hsf section JsS lOf
samtl IS az follows: IL all these cases the priuci-
ual points Of attention are whether me circuM-
stances and declarations offered In proof were 50
connected with the main fact under consideration
~ Ia illEs IT. character 10 further It's object
or 10 form in conjunction with IL one continuous
ira Isactap. IL was al one time thought necessary
inat thcy s.Ould be cOntcmporancous VIII u, but
this doc trne has OF late years been rejecied' ana
rel &C Of time must Away be considered - mate
rial evidence TO show lhe connection, II i by 10
means f-eeufldi. Dlu- IN kluity -. by &c. "Htn
the disputcd act Of b. nkfnptcy was a frauiulelt
transfer, declaration By the bankrupt IN which
he gave false account Ot the matter Was received
IN evidence though made nearly a month siIsr tiie
d cluraiions are ofien said t. be admissible IS con
siitutIng part Of tie res gesfG." tfhil. on Eyi-
ace, page lS5. iiayden's Case, 9ih Reporter,
2S7J
The mere lapse OF time does not affect the
res oesfr. See Little's case, IS Graft. 92l,
and JoTdsn's case, tbid., si3 see also tireen-
Ieaf on Evidence, Vol. j, section los, Note
!, p. l45: IN :.
appears that the servant made his state
nent (of the reason OF his goiDg) one night
and on the next morning he was gone.
Miss Madison made her statement OF rea-
son object, purpose OF going) on the eve
ming OF March 10th, and started or the
next day as soon as she could. II she had
merely repeated TO Mrs. Dickinson the con-
tents OF the letter without mentioning or
exhibiting the letter. as her reason for
coming 10 Richmond the Commonwealth
could undoubtedly have introduced hes
statement as part OF the res 0estG Ia
characterize her act OF going" having
shown that she started as soon as she could
and came TO Richmond. But as the case
stood IL was absolutely necessary 10 intro
duce the letter as being the best evidence
In the possession OF the Commonwealth
10 prove the inducement declared 10 Mrs
Dickinson for her coming 10 Richmond.
The letter was admitted by the Court. not a.
the statements ofits ostensibe author. N IS
Curtis, and not whether true or false. but
as the declaration OF the deceased prepare
tory 10 her coming and as the reason for
her coming TO Richmond. where she did
come immediately-to her death. lt was
never attempted to prove the truth OF the
statements or contents OF the letter F; IL was
wholly immaterial 10 the object Of Its intro.
ducuOn, whether IL were true or false. It's
exclusion because IL was false and forgery
or produced by the calculated policy OF the
actors, would only be as against It's intro
duction by and for the prisoner.
Evidence Of preparation Is always adnissible