Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-01-15
THE KILLING OF A RAcE-HORsE.
Tho judgment Awarding Meiendy and
Russell SIT ZOO Affirmed.

In the Supreme Court of Appeals yester-
day two very important cases were de-
cided In that of Barbour, receiver,
against Melendy and Russell, which was
an appeal from & decree OF the Circuit
Court of Alexandra rendered November
2e. 1883. the judgment in the lower court
was affirmed. The case involved the kill
ing of the thoroughbred horse Bristow.
owned by Meleudy and Russell, appellees.
and was tried by jury by consent IN the
Circuit Court Of Alexandra, where YER
diet of 81 10 was awarded the plaintiffs.
An appeal was then taken TO the Supreme
Court and the cnee was subsequently re-
manded TO Is Circuit Court of Lynch
burg, where a new verdict was awarded IN
the sum of $1,000. The verdict was ap,,
proved by the trial court and certined
back to the Circuit Court or Alexandra
and made the basis CT the decree OF that
court, which was appealed from.
THE VALUE OF THE HORSE.
The most important point in question
was the value OF the horse, which wit
pesses differed with regard 10, and the
opinion declared that the court could not
upon this single question change the decl-
sion OF the lower court. The horse was
killed while beng shipped by rail from
Lynchburg TO Culpeper, where be was to
enter the races. The oninion was delivered
by Judge Lacy.
THE RIGHT TO TRIAL By jury.
In the case of Miller against the Com
monwealth from the Circuit Court OF
Rockingham county the opinion. which
was delivered by Judge Lewis and dissent
ed to by Judge Lacy, was voluminous
aud interesting paper. Mary Miller, the
plaintiff in error, was tried before justice
of the peace of Rockingham county and
sentenced to pay tine or 800 for mis-
demeanor. from which she appealed to the
County Court. and before any further pro-
ceedings were had she moved the court TO
ouash the warrant and discharge her from
custody on the ground that the justice had
no jurisdiction IN the case. The motion
was overruled and her case came up
tor trial, the jury returning yer-
dict of guilty and fixing her pun
ishment at one month and twenty days in
Jail and fine of Sl7. motion for new
trial was oyerruled, but writ OF error
was awarded by Dne of the judges OF the
Supreme Court. The paper quotes from
the Code and says: Justices ofpeace and
police justices ale given jurisdiction over
the offence concurrent with that OF the
county and corporation courts" The wo-
man was charged with keeping disorder
ly house. The opinion states that the
guarantee Of the Constitution relied on -
plain and unambiguous and declares IN
unmstakable terms that in all criminal Of
fences the accused has the right TO speedy
trial by an impartial jury.
MINOR OFFENCES TRIABLE WITHOUT JURY.
1t further explains that there are many
minor offences. such as Sabbath breaking,
drunkenness. vagrancy. &C., which are
trlable without Jury, and the right OF
trial by jury il that which existed when
| the Constitution was adopted. The paper
stipulates that the keeping of q disorderly
house does not come in this class, and
terms it an offence of gross nature.
There is no authority" the opinion de-
clares, ''of which We are aware that holds
that the offence is. or at any time in our
judicial history ever was, triable without
Jury, and il Is needless to say that IL IS not
competent for the Legislature by classify
ing it. as u has doIe IN section 4l06 OF the
Code, with offences which are so triable,
to deprive person accused Of the offence
of the benefit OF o jury trial" The
judgment Of the lower court was reversed
and the plaintiff ordered TO be discharged
from custody
GrizzIe against Sutherland. From the Circuit
Court Of Russell county. Reversed. Judge Lacy
delivering the opinion
Court OF scott county. Affirmed, Judge Faunt
leroy delivering the opinion.
Richmond and Dabville Railroad Company
against Rudd. From The Circuit Court Of Rich
mond. Affirmed, Judge Hinton delivering the
opinion.
Commonwealth sgalnst Bsllentine; Common
wealth against Roper; Commonwealth against
Dodson. From tho Ctfcut Court OF the city OF
Norfolk. Af1rmed by equally divided court.
Jordan against Katz Dismissed for failure TO
print.
Hill against the Commonwealth. Submitted.
Harris, executor, against Harris. Further az
gued BY 8. v. Southal. Esq, for appellee and
Colonel h 4. w. Duke for appellant and sub
United.