The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-03-21
HEAR lR6UmEnT
N CUTCH|N Case
SUPREME COURT HEARS CELE-
DRAFTED ROANOkE CASE PRE-
sENrED AT LENGTH.
CUTCHIN'S PETITION
DECLARES HE HAS BEEN DIsGRAC-
ED AND INUNDATED ny A
VERDICT ARRIVED AT ny
ILLEGAL EVIDENCE.

The case of Cutchin, plaintiff in
error. against the city OF Roanoke.
defendant In error. was argued before
the Supreme Court of Appeals yes
terday, and submitted
Mayor Cutchins case was present.
ed by Judge j. W. Henson. who at
one time was Judge OF tho Circuit
Court Of Carroll county, and as such
presided at the spot where Judge
+. L. Mass!e met his death. Mr.. X.
II. Wills also argued the case for
Mr.. Cutchin, while the city of Roa-
noke was represented by IA. NJ. Smith.
Of Richmond, and Marshall Mccor-
mick, OF Roanoke.
The record in the case Is
voluminous. comprising several bum
dred printed pages.
In his statement of facts In his
petition. Mayor Cutchin sets out that
he was first elected mayor OF Roa-
noke in 1902 and reelected by a
large majority in 1901. In 1903 he
was elected for a term OF four years
He certifies that he is Confederate
veteran: that he has a wife and five
children and "A number of rand
children. In describing the situation
attending the beginning Of his prose-
cution he said he only knew from
what appeared In the newspapers and
from rumors on the street what was
being done by the grand jury. He had,
lie declared. no opportunity 20 appear
before the grand jury or to send wit
nesses before It, and he declares its
report Wig purei" ex parte.
Disaraced In Old Age.
Discussing the judgment Of the
court. presided over by Judge Null
len, of Petersburg. the mayor said in
hts statement. TT Is not improper
that he should state that the result
In this ease ~a1 brought abeut by the
court allowing evidence tending to al
feet the personal but not the ctsieia !
stan:irg Of your petitioner In Roa-
;oke city. and h was because of the
prejudice feeling and passion brought
about by this inadmissible and Illegal
evidence that brings upon your peti-
toner in his old age, and his family.
disgrace humiliation and rnortffiea-
don. and he protests that with fair
and impartial trial, confined to the
evidence OF official misconduct ON
cial misfeasance and ofnclai maieas-
ance I'm office he would have been ac-
quilted. He cannot impress upon
the court TOO strongly the fact. and
therefore he repeats. that the result
In this case was brought about by II
legal evidence and but for the ad-
mission of this testimony the result
must have been different
NAYS lr1Al WAS Not MI.
Continuing the statement says;
Your petitioner insists that thal hs
has not had fair and impartial trial.
and he earnestly urges this court, in
view OF his public service. his per-
sonal character, and the reputation
OF his family. to save him from the
modification and humiliation that mas
been placed upon him by an improper
and unjust verdict
He further declares that he. durint
bis term " Office. did reduce the mum
Der OF disorderly houses IN his cHS
and that he segregated them IRON
rh. residential and business section.
/ of the city, and declares that he work
! ed eonscientiously looking to the uiti
mate eradication OF such places.
BY virtue Of the laws delay Mr
{ cutchin still holds forth as mavo'
Of Roanoke, notwithstanding the al
verse verdict Of several months ago
! His successor will be. elected in du'
course this spring and Mr.. Cutchins
term will expire on September LIST
] In event Of an adverse decAs'o'
BIZ the Supreme Court his office wouie
h., vacated AT once, while favorable
decision will cave him In power foi
the remainder Of the term.
The second case argued yesterday
was that of the Exposition Arcade Cor
poration W.. Lit Brothers. Argued Q,
n. r.. Hicks, for appellant. and b,
r. Il. Baird. Jr.. for appellee, ane
submitted
Next cases called.
Kidd ct ais. vs. Virginia Safe De
posit and Trust Corporation.
i, Monk ct ala Va. Barnett ct ais.
/ Ronos rs, the Ferries Company,
! Rurrwyn ". Norfolk and Western
I n, rafnnany Ais,