Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1904-04-14
NOVEL LEGAL
QUESTION RAISED
In Case Of Henry WOOdard Who Is
Sentenced to Be Hung on the
22nd Instant.
new TRIAL MAY BIZ ORDERED
He Was Not Tried By Due Process Of Law,
As the Venire Was Not Properly
Drawn or the Writ Issued in
Compliance With the Pre-
vision of a New
gfafufQ

At the February term of the circuit
court Henry Woodsrd was tried for kill
ing Frank Tabor. He was found guilty of
murder in the first degree and sentenced
by the court 10 be hung on the 22nd day
Of April, 1904.
A short time ago counsel for the con-
demned man started movement to have
the sentence commuted to imprisonment
for life. But few days ago the same
counsel discovered what they believed to
be an error committed by the trial court
which made the whole trial invalid.
Under the old statute the trial judge
was required to furnish list to the clerk,
directing him to issue venire facias from
the list of sixteen persons to serve as ju-
rors. Judge Henson before the beginning
of the February term sent such list to
the clerk of the circuit court OF Tazewell
county and venire facias was issued COM
manding the sheriff of Tazewell county to
summon the sixteen persons named in the
writ for the trial of the case of the Com.
monw ealth vs. Henry Woodard. When
the case was called and the jury was or
dered to be empaneled it was found that
only ten of the sixteen persons ordered to
be summoned in the writ Of venire facias
were present. The court then furnished
an additional list of six persons to be sum-
moned by another venire facias to serve
as Jurors in the trial of the said case. In
this way the jury that tried Woordard was
procured.
1t seems that on the 10th day of Febru-
ary, 1904, ten days before the case Of
Woodland was called for trial and the Sec
ond venire facas was ordered and issued,
there had been an Act approved by the
Governor of Virginia which changed the
entire manner of making up the list from
which the persons named in writ of
veuire facias are to be selected. That Act
IN part is as follows:
"The writ of venire facias in case Of fel-
ony, shall command the officer to whom 1T
is directed to summon l6 persons OF his
county or corporation, to be taken from a
list furnished him by the CLERK issuing
the writ. The list men,
toned in this section shall contain the
names of TWENTY persons DRAWN for
that purpose by the CLERK of the court
OF his deputy from the names and box
provided for by Secs. 3l42 and 3l44 of the
Code of Virginia"
That makes a complete and radical
change in the method or plan by which a
list for venire facias in felony case is
made up. Heretofore the trial judge
handed the list to the clerk. After the
Act which went into force on the 10th OF
February became law the clerk was d.
rected to draw the list from box in
which a number Of names Of qualified
jurors had been placed.
The jury that tried Henry Woodard
was summoned from a writ that was Issued
under the provisions Of a statute that had
been repealed, that had been superseded
by an Act which changed the entire meth
cd for making up and issuing venire fa'
cias. One Of the wisest and most inviolable
principles Of the law is that no man can
be tried without due process Of law. 1t is
the contention of counsel that Henry
Woodard has been tried and convicted
without due process Of law, because the
yenire facias was inyalld and void. They
claim that the first step taken by the trial
court was erroneous and invalid and this
fact is disclosed upon the face of the re-
cord. The fact is that neither the court
nor counsel for the prisoner or the prose
cution knew at the time Of the trial thai
this important change had been made In
the manner of making and issuing a wri'
of venire facias. But thai. lack OF knowl'
edge on their part should not deprive the
accused of his right to be tried by drC
process of law. The Bill of Rights de
clares. "That no man shall be deprived
of his life, or liberty, except by the law o
the land" 1t looks very much like Henry
Woodard has not been tried by due pro
cess of law, and that he is likely to be de
prived of his life in violation Of the Bill o
Rights, unless he secures new trial. hi
may be guilty of the crime for which hi
has been convicted and sentenced to b.
hung, but it would be unjust and agains
public policy to hang him without givinI
him trial by due process of law.