The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-03-28

|
a new trial. These acts were pre-
sented to tho Supreme Court of tn,
state. and they waived the dofens,
aside without even granting a writ o
error. and held themselves to b,
shacklcd by precedent.
ITO this was added the fact that ir
later trials all OF the evidence of con
spiracy introduced by the Common
shown TO be evidence derived appar-
entity from the same source. as the
aforementioned evidence furnished by
MIR. Goad.
we further respectfully submit that
we arc reliably informed and the rec
ord shows that the Supreme Court OF
the United States refused writ OF
error or technical grounds. We sub
! nit that tho life of IA citizen Of the
state should not be forfeited simply
because technically in court OF law
| there is no relief, and that II was TO
meet just such cases AS this that the
| sovereign people OF Virginia gave to
The Governor of the State the power of
pardon and communications
Ideal Case For Clcmcncy.
"a no more ideal case for executive
Interference could be imagined ant,
no case could come more squarcly
within the contemplation of our law
I'm giving this right to the Governor,
than one where defendant is con
victed and about 10 be executed on
evidence discovered to have been false
since the trial and too late TO give him
new trial, which, the Jury that con-
vcted him now say in petition to
You caused them to convict
This we present to YOU, and ii will
not do to waive aside the absolutely
unanswerable reasons for the exercise
! of executive clemency with a state
ment that Mr.. Wysor. In opening the
| case of the Commonwealth We. Sidna
Allen. strenuousiy insisted that there
had been a conspiracy but did not
think II necessary To introduce owl
dence thereof on the trial. AS though
II were possible TO conceive that men
making the desperate attempt to Sc
cure convictions OF murder in the first
degree that counsel for the prosecu-
ton We're in these cases. would have
omitted that evidence of prenedita-
| ton and elaboration that of itself
made the crimes murder in the first
degree, il they had not known by expe-
rience In the Victor Allen case that
the defense could utterly break 1t
down. The results OF the trial show
that to secure convictions of murder
in the first degree it was necessary
TO introduce this testimony.
And this is not all, for the most
tention of Your Excellcncy to the fact
the alleged perjury of Goad. G. y. Mac
Alexander, 5. g. NJ. Faddis and H. c.
Weaver. which brought about Claude
Aliens conviction on his third trial
Again, the TWO vcrdicts in the Sidna
Allen case rendered after time had
cooled the public prejudice, after all
OF the evidence bearing on the case was
al hnt oil
derei under circumstances vastly more
| favorable TO a fair and impartial tria1
| than the verdicts theretofor rendered
and rendered by juries specially select
| ed on a request to the judge OF thei,
respective counties TO furnish the
hames of the best men in his county
| These verdicts will have to be char.
acterized by YOU as plain and inexplic.
! able miscarriages of justice. regardless.
| OF what the testimony was. If YOU ad.
hero TO the opinion first formed.
100000 tn Capture.
| ITO ;his We would add but one fur.
ther statement. We would call the at.
tention of your eNccllcncy To the fac,
that YOU have spent in this matter
perhaps some $4,000 or $4,000 of tho
money in the death of these men. and
invested vast sum of the people.
money nthe death o fthesc men. ant
consciously or unconsciously. W. foa,
that this fact weighs with YOU anc
PERHAPS Influences YOU in tho conclu
sion that YOU have reached
And so we say, with all due respect
TO YOU as man and as the C;overnoi
OF the state. that We believe and thinl
that ii YOU will face the facts fairl,
that you VIII find that had Won hcc,
Judge OF court in which these case.
came up for trial. YOU would hay,
been obliged, in fairness to yoursel
and TO the defendants. to certify th,
You were incapacitatcd from trvins
the cases on account OF prcconceiv.d
feeling If, then. YOU would not bo,.
heen competent to administer tho har,
and fast and cold rules OF law in In,
trial of one OF these defendants Tho,
for much stronger reason We bc
licNc that YOU will see that YOU wer,
not in position 10 weigh impartiall,
In" considerations for and against RI.
exercise Of the broader function -
executive cIcmcncy which appeals NOR
directly TO equity and conscience tina,
with the mere conduct OF a trial
Ask Tor Commission.
'For these reasons we say that the
feelings Of the people OF Virginia ar,
outraged, that their sense OF justic.
has been wrongeG. that no mereh
passing within dictates this appe;
which has come TO YOU almost as III.
voice OF one man, and We, bclieyins
That great wrong will he done. no
only 10 the defendants themselves In,
10 the people Of this state by the exc
cution OF thoes men make this ina
request that Your ENccilcncy will ap
point commission. We would sug
gcst that IL be composed OF professor
Martin Eurks OF the Washington an,
Lee University. whom YOU have quoted
and the seven foreIncn of the sever
lurics Who presided in these cases. %
any other impartial body of men VIII,
you name, and let this commission In