The new dominion. [volume] (Morgantown, W. Va.) 1876-1904, 1897-11-17
A HISTORY
l0f the Now Famous Musgrave
Case.
1t Shows What Is Sometimes Accom-
plished by the begged Persistence OF
Attorneys in the Interests Of Their
Clients-The Prejudice Not Near So
Strong Against the Accused and He
May 60 Free.

Strong Against the Accused and He
May 60 Free.
This remarkable case, after nearly
three years has ended, now comes
back from the Supreme Court of APP
peals. with direction for new trial,
and the State starts where it did,
when the indictment was found.
On the 18th day of December,
1894. at near o'clock p. M, Mrs.
Emeline Musgraye, the wife of the
defendant David Musgrave. was
found dead in a pool of water in a
small stream near David Musgrave's
house in this county. Near the honse
up to 8 o'clock literary society was
holding a meeting. David Musgrave
said he and his wife retired about
s o'clock. Not long after, his wife
got up and went eas; he did not
think strange of that; but when she
had been gone an unreasonable time
he became alarmed, and got up and
searched for her, around the premi-
ses, and could not find her; then be-
ing more alarmed, he went to the lit
erary society and called out his two
sons and the three searched, but
could not find nc. then he notified
the literary society, and general
search was made, and her body was
found in the pool of water above
spoken Of. She was buried the next
day; and suggestions having been
made that she may have been killed
and thrown in the water, her body
was exhumed and an autopsy was
had, at which number of physi-
clans were present. The report of
the physicians who made the autop-
sy was made, and David Musgrave,
her husband was arrested for her
murder, and was held for trial. The
trial was had at the June term of
the circuit court of Monongalia
county in 1895 amid the greatest ex-
citement, the general impression
prevailing, with but slight evidence
many now think, on which to base
it, that David Musgrave was wife
murderer. He was, after long trial
convicted of murder in the first de-
gree, and the jury found that he
should be confined in the peniten-
tiary. In accordance with the YER
dict, Judge Hagans passed sentence
upon him of life Imprisonment.
He was ably prosecuted by Geo
G. Baker, the prosecuting attorney
of the county, and ably assisted by
Frank Cox, Col. Fast and others.
| That able and accomplished, civil
and criminal lawyer, Geo. c. Stur-
giss, led the defense, assisted by
Joseph Moreland, Hon Okey John
son, l.. v Keck and others. There
was no point in the case that Mr.
Sturgiss did not save. which could
| by possibility avail the prisoner in
the Appellate Court But strong
exculpatory evidence, and able ar
guments could not avert the verdict
and he was found guilty. Judge Ha
gans overruled the motion for new
trial, and gave 30 days to file bills
of exception.
JUDGE Johnson. now Dean of oul
law college, at Mr.. Sturgiss' request
was now called in to prepare the
case for the Appellate Court. He
had not been present at the trial
| He waded through the manuscript
received of over 1000 pages. and
prepared six several bills of excep.
/ lions to the rulings of the court. the
last. on the ground that the verdict
was against the evidence. that Tho
tevidence was entirely.and plainly in.
lutlicient TO sustain the verdict
Having presented the bills to Judge
Haoans thew were duly stoned. and
and then Jndoe Johnson presented
the petition and read in August
1895 to Judge English at PIT. Pleas
| ant which Judge granted the writ q
error at the term of court to be held
at Charleston in January. 1896
Judge johnson argued the case there
| in Feb, 1896. with Attorney General
| Riley. representing the State. Al
| the special spring term 1896. judge
Brannon at Charleston handed dowr
an opinion afIirmino the INDICTMENT
lof the circuit court The opin-
ion was concurred in by Judge Eng.
llish and Holt. Judge Dent. dissent.
ing. JUDGE johnson obtained a copx
| of the opinion and prepared a nett.
ton for re-hearing in which he re-
viewed the opinion. and endeayored
| to show the court it had decided
wrong. The petition was filed in The
name of johnson & Sturgiss and a,
the June term. 1896. of the court 9
re-hearing was granted At tht
| September term of the court
llS96. johnson went to Charleston
where he for Musqraye and
. | ATTORNEY Gen'l Riley for the State
re-arcued the case The court toob
| it under adyisement and Judpe Holt
on the 3lst dav of December 1896
RETIRING from the bench the case wa,
| put on the January docket for 1897
| for re-aroument before the court now
composed of Judge Brannon English
lDent and McWborter the last tax
! ing his seat on the bench Jan lst
| 1897 bavina been elected in Nov
500 Tn February 1897 Attornex
/ Gen'l Riley for the State and Jndc,
Johnson a1ain aroued and submitted
| the case and ON Wednesday Nov