The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-02-01
l,IILIGAN MUST
SERVE HIS TERN
Supreme Court Refuses to Grant
Him New Trial.
HE is DISAPPOINTED.
Saws He Docs Not Sec How tho Court
Could l;efusc-Jnd:e phlc:ar and
Buchanan Disscnt-Opinions
in Other Cases.
HE is DISAPPOINTED

The case OF y. c. (N1cl0 Ciafsan vs.
Commonwealth, appealed from tiic County
Cour; OF Isle of Wight, iGron a writ Of
error fcr new trial, WAS by far the
mos, interesting of those in which op'n-
ions were rendered by The Supreme Court
yesterday.
This case constitutes one OF the most
celebrated OF The criminal prosecutions
had in Virginia for many years, and has
beer, hc.4ldcsi by She press and much dis
cusse-d 10y The lawyers and lasfiien ever
since the killing CT &. Beverley nfhef,
in Christmas week. 1922, by The io"cT OF ms
bt.ntlrG. young. daughter. Isabelle. Gil
1j.sn viii have 10 serve his sentence If
eighteen years in the 1,er..tentialy in ac-
..orsan,c with the verdict of the jury
and the action of tho Court of Appeals
IA affirming The sentence OF Inc uiti
,e1,rt. The st-5n; dissenting opinion in
this ease rendered by Judge Phlesar con-
Statutes a very interesting feature IN yes
rcraay,s bulge: 81 decisions Iucse b"cI'-
anan aiso iissertcd.
The case of the Fidelity Loan and Trust
Co. vs. E.nglehv {. ais, :ipeaiec from
4be Circui: Court of The CITY Of Roanoke
and reversed. invclves tie Questions OF
deeds of gin. &c. TIC origin Ct the dept
asserted.
IN Norfolk aua Western Railway en-
many rs. Mann appealed from the Circuit
Court of Prince Edward county, and re-
yc-sea. s-afnc Interesting points were DC
cjacti relating 10 the ialw governing cases
where inconsistent instructions are
granted
The opinion Of X. & w Ry- Co. vs.
Wood. etc. appealed from the Circuit
Court of Augusta county and reversed
outlines The Limitations 10 the duty rail-
.
who may he injured while on the promises
of such companies.
New Trial Refused Gi1liEan-
,-i,l;.,,, vs. Commonwealth. From the
County Court OF Isle OF Wight OPINION
l,y Judge Keith, T.
G Gillisan WAS indicted in tn" county
Court of Isle OF Wight for the murder OF
q r Turner. was tried, found guilty and
sentenced TO a term of eighteen years IN
the penitcntiary-
lures No lri.l of exceptions was taken
during the trial, hence there is no record
Of tho rulings upon the admission of t"S-
-tp,ony instructions TO the jury, nor the
evidence.
A transcript was obtained of the record
as il appears upon the order BOOK OF the
County Court of isle Of Wight, and upon
that transcript a writ of error was award
Appeals.
Inc nrst error assigned is the REFUSAL
l,v The County Court Of the motion OF the
rriscner 10 be tried in the Circuit Court,
The cont ention of his counsel being that
1,y an act of 1881 80. which WAS not amend
ed l,y the change made to section 4olo OF
the Code by acts Of 1884. p go. giving
county courts exclusive original jurlsdlc-
zion of such offenscs the right to remove
,i,a case to the Circuit Court was pre-
served This WAS held not TO be in error.
Tie next assignment OF error arises
anon th,. record ~ the proceedings in the
County Court of June Sd 1890, where X
is cont ended the record does not show
tt,at the vcruict pom this Indictment was
lcn.lclcd ly the jury in open court in thu
l,r,esencn of The prisoner And received and
recorded by The court: that these essen
tial facts must appear from an inspection
Of the record. and no intcndmcnt will sup
PLY tl,tir omission; and that the maxim
'all things are presumed to have been
properly done in Il court of record. can
not he resorted 10 in trials for felony.
The record WIS had to be sufficiently
clear, in view of the discussions OF this
court in Crunp VS.. Commonwealth. % S.
Z. r., go; and Lonsley rs. Common
wealth. . Ea. Sup. CT. Rep. y. 651.
In summing up the opinion the court
SAYS: Nc are aware that courts riGidly