Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-03-17
SUNDAY. .....MARCH II, 1895.
'Tte GOoJmau Cnsc.


The verdict OF the Albemarle jury IN
the case Of Conductor Goodman. charged
with killing Colonel II. c. Parsons. was
rather a surprise TO US. After Judge NC
Laughlin had decided that much OF the
testimony admitted at the trial which
took place at Covington was inadmissl-
bic we expected a light verdict compared
with that which was rendered upon the
nrst trial but we were not quite prepared
for the acquittal OF the prisoner.
After the first trial Of Goodman one OF
his counsel was appointed county Judge
Of Allegheny. and 1t was then agreed
between counsel for the State and the
prisoner that the case should be removed
to another county. The county selected
for the new trial was Albemsrle, and the
proper order for the removal thither OF
the case was made In the Allegheny
County Court.
This new trial took place in county
IN which neither Of the principals 10 'he
tragedy bad any following. before judge
whose standing is high, and by a jury
oil. or most. Of whom were strangers
alike to the prisoner and TO the man
whom he killed. Under these clrcuh-
stances we are bound to lay aside our
own Impressions and believe that the YER
diet OK the jury was correct
Upon the first trial the jury found
Goodman guilty OF murder in the second
degree and ascertalned his punishment at
eighteen years in the penitentiary. FROM
the Judgment thereupon entered 'he
prisoner appealed TO the Circuit Court OIL
Alleghany. and Judge Mclaughlin granted
n new trial. Who knows but that If ese
State could have appealed from Jude
Mclaughlin 10 the Supreme court ol
Appeals Judge Mclaughlin would not
have been reversed and the trial court
sustained? But the state has no such
right Of appeal-it never has had an!
such right and never VIII have; not III
our time. certainly. But the widespread
Interest that this case has enlisted ana
the varying views as TO the rlghtness OF
the verdict are bound TO call attention 10
those laws Of ours which compel per-
son accused Of a capital offence 10 De
tried in the County Court and give MIN
the right Of appeal from the County court
20 the Circuit Court and from the Circuit
Court 10 the Supreme Court OF Appeals.
Had Goodman been convicted at Char
lottesville yesterday he would have had
the right Of appeal TO new circuit )uuse
and from him to the Supreme Court OF
Appeals-the case having been removed
from Judge McLaughlin's cicuit to Judge
Crjmsleys circuit. In our Virginia cities
a person accused of a capital onehce Is
,rie1 in the Corporation Court. and his
only appeal is 10 the Supreme Court OF
Anpeals. In other words, he has but one
chance after conviction. whereas the man
tried I'm a county court has two chances
az getting the judgment Of the trial court
reversed. This doesn't look right AT any
rate IT gives double opportunity Tor the
miscarriage Of justice.
Whenever the public is dissatisfied Win
q verdict its indignation is spent upon 'he
3,rv Consideration ia not given 10 the
view that many Of the facts OF the case
es known to the public are not alo"eu
20 co to the jury. Nor Is much thoush'
given 10 the fact that the judges instruc-
lions often seem to the jury TO lean 10
,ne accused. In this very case the instrue-
,ions prepared by the defence were auop'-
"A nv the trIal-iudge, and this must nave
had a powerful effect upon the jury
men So, II there has been any mlscar-
rage of Justice in the Goodman CASE
the fault may as we'll be attributed 10
the Gentlemen learned in the law as 10
the gentlemen OF the jury.
Another thing possibly had weight with
che tury in favor OF the prisoner. This
was that counsel had been engaged oS
the friends or family Of Colonel Parsons
20 assist in Goodman's prosecution Inc
gentlemen who accepted this employment
are honorable men, and lawyers OF pronh-
nence: but we dare say that the faet OIL
,hs,r employment was used to the preJu-
Ate. NJ the prosecution. And so II is gene
rally in Virginia; yes, even though II pe
perfectly plain (as 1t sometimes is) 'ha'
these lawyers have consented to assist 'he
Commonwealth. not for "blood-mohey'
. ~, that they may do the part OF GOOD
citizens. in seeing that our laws are exc
cuted.
The D!epatch has over and over again
.xn,essed its earnest convection that II
a. the duty OF our General Assembly 10
PASS a law providing that help SHAH DC
given to the attorneys for the Common
wealth where needed. For this purpose OUT
Attorney-General might be allowed one
or two assistants. who should stand READY
10 be assigned to this duty. Oiher states
have found II necessary TO give their
nrosecuting-oficers help in special cases.
and we. too. have got TO do II sooner OF
later. As the law now stands. Common
wealths attorney must either DO all the
work himself. which would sometimes os
impossible OF accomplishment-or. II ac-
complished would leave him physical
and mental wreck-or friends OF the ac-
cused must engage counsel 10 help him.
and thereby possibly. prejudice the case
Those who are IN the habit OF COM
planning OF the failure OF criminal justice
IN Virginla--and they are many-wouio
do well TO exert themselves 20 Induce the
General Assembly 10 give our attorneys
for the Commonwealth assistance In spe-
cial cases. 1t is too much TO expect that
any Commonwealth Attorney VIII be
able 20 stand the drudgery. excitement
and responsibility OF a capital case which
lasts for weeks and weeks. where he
alone has 60 face a great array of able
counsel for the defence. In all such cases
our Commemorative attorneys should
have help. and the State should furnish
that help.
s-----------------.-----------==
$500 rEtal-Greeu ba q \ S-SilVer.