The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1904-11-10
lNzz'2az1zyzz&
4zAs 9 g2ZS : :

N1cCue's daughter Ruby, Mrs. Marshall
| Dinwddic, Mrs. p. Q. McCue and one
or two others After staying about fftecn
| minutes, the entire party arose and left.
This was before the sentence was pass
| ed. McCue faced the ordeal alone.
AS soon as tho preliminary business
| was dispatched Deputy Sergeant Woods,
who had, charge Of the jury during the
case. was placed on the stpnd.. He. said
| that sinces the trial was opened a num-
| her. Of the neutrality-suspicious.. two-t thirds
had read newspapers. y The newspaper
| most extensively yrca d. was The, Times
| Dispatch, of Richmond. Ii! The witness
| could not recall distinctly; whether any
| other papers had been@read- or not. 1t
| was also Impossible for him to say posi-
lively whether or not the News Leader,
| OF Richmond. or the Progress, of Char
| lottcsvIlle, had been read by the Jury to
| any extent. Flo recalled one occasion
| when Mr.. Parsons left tho breakfast
table and bought several copies Of the
News Leader, which he handed around
! among his Acknowledgement.
Ibid you caution the m cmbers OF tho;
Jury against reading anything about the
trial?" asked Mr. Gllmer.
II did several times.
Deputy Noel who was associated with
Woods IN caring for the jury. took tho
stand He, too. said the gentlemen had
frequently read tho newspapers, but to
the best OF his knowledge and belief they
had read nothing concerning the case in
which they were then sitting.
"Did YOU caution the members OF the
Jury against reading anything about the
trial?" asked Mr.. Gllmer again.
.T cautioned them repeatedly" replied
Mr.. Noel
This constituted the sum and substance
Of the testimony. Mr.. Lee then offered
as part Of tile record a file of The
Times Dispatch from October 18th tl',
November 9Th, inclusive: of the News,
Leader, from October 18th to November
4t1, inclusive. and Of the charlottesville
Progress, from October 18th to November
4tll, inclusive. Mr.. Gilmer objected on
to show that the. jr,rymen had read all
tho papers introduced and that the gen.,
tlnnen OF the defense must present to
the court the particular articles and
headlines read by each Of the jurymen.
The court however, permitted. the intro
duction Of the papers, declaring that
they would have to be considered IN con-
nectlon with tile statements made by: each
OF the jurymen on Saturday last,rwst
Motions Overruuled
After a brief. conference the attorneys
for the defense announced; that they
would submit the motions to the court
without argument Judge Norris there
upon took up the{record Of the proceed
angs, arid, referring to the statement
of Mr.. Coleman, made on Saturday over
ruled the motions separately and 5coloc-
lively. His ruling may be summarized as
follows: ;ts tsr@ easEsS s63d. "a
Because Of erroneous rulings of the
court during the pros ress OF tho trial In
respect to the ndmisslbiEty of evidence
and in respect TO questions which were
permitted TO be asked 1, and .s such as were were
received no now light that would cause it
to alter its previous rulings on this point.
Because Of the mIdreciGns y the
jury, ETC.: The court labored to avoid
any mistake in this matter and believes
there was none. any mistake was
because Of the amendments made by
the court lin certain, instructions asked
for by the accused! In reference ito this
motion sthe. court repeats Its statement
made In connection with the motion Inn,
=mcdiately preceding. ~ e. ~
BECAUSE Of the statemcntbmad by
Captain Woods in the c0urt-ronnl IN re-
spect to his !haying refused q retainer In
this case; The court could not set aside
fact, Mt II loss to comprehend the precise
reasons Of tile gentlemen ofsthe defense
for the motion The court, understood
consent of both sides In the opinion OF
the court Captain Woods had not pro-
ceeded to the point where his remarks
the Jury.
Fecausc the jurymen were permitted
during The progress Of the trial to read
court confesscs that this is the only
reviewing II the court had 10 take Into
men themselves. Tt Ind mot been shown
that amy Of Them were Influenced in any
way ~ What w they may haze We seen or
therefore, overrulcd this motion also.
'In Short declared Judge Morris, In
conclusion. the court overrulcs tho mo-
ton Of the defense to set aside tho YER
dict and grant II new trial"
To Arrest Judgment.
Tho utmost nulet prevailed In the court.
room Mr.. Coleman arose and made
motion for nm arrest OF Judgment IIe
| did this on the ground that the verdict
| Of the jury WAS lnsuffleient TO support
| n Judgment fer murder in the first degree.
| The Jury had found tho prisoner guilty
| as charged In the within Indictment OF
| murder In the first degree. The indict-
! lNeUt WIS SiHlpiT loV InNiuEr. Inuef II n
| conviction might have been had for muir.
| der in the hrst Or second degree or for
| mansaughter. voluntary. or Involuntary
| The speaker laid great stress upon tho
! language guilty as charged" and do
| elaf'ed that the prisoner was charged sim
! ply with murder, II would be an error
| for His Honor "a assume the responsibility
| Of determining the degree Of guilt ho
| could not undertake to say OF what tac
| jury had found the prisoner guilty.
| The court WAS Of tho opinion that the
| latter part OF the verdict showed clearly
| the degree Of the murder of which the.
| jnty had found the prisoner guilty. In
| tine opinion Of the court the language of
I the verdict was sufficient. The court
| thereupon oyerruled this motion also. The
4 defense noted ,en exception
Sentence Passed.
! rye proceedings were then over. In
| the presence OF q aeath-like stiffness the
1 court passed sntence upon the prisoner.
4 Within AN hour after the session began
4 the people were on the streets again II