The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-01-20
MONDAY. JANUARY 30. Is1a.
THREADING ON DANGEROUS GROUND.


The Charlottesville Progress observes that
the average layman will and it dinaeuit to
reason out how It possible for Claude
Allen to be denied new trial, and writ
of error to be granted In the case OF Harvey
d. Iconsy." the slayer of Oscar Nj. Martin Of
Newcastle, Craig county.
The Progress assures its readers that 1t is
not criticistug the court, but we merely call
up these two cases because they were acted
on the same day" And again; Evidently
the court had the facts before It
but we still hold to the view that those IN
learned in the Law will not be able TO reason
II out to their own satisfaction
II the editor Of the Progress had taken the
trouble TO read the news story OF the decisions
the morning after they were handed down by
The court. there would have been no necessity
for an editorial expression which has a tend
eacy to arouse u1audlin sentiment for q con-
vscfea man and 10 inspire at least lack OF
respect for the States highest judicial tribunal
The cases of Harvey d. Looney and Claude
Allen. insofar as their status before the SUI
prone court Was concerned. were similar in
only two respects-each was condemned to
death for murder and each had made second
appeals TO the court. II vas coincidence
that the opinions in each case were handed
down on the same day. which. of course, has
nothing to do with the affair except as worthy
OF passing comment
The second appeal for Looney In the
shape OF an amended petition which involved
apparent intustices to the defendant in the
court ceiow. which. while they were embodied
In the transcript of the evidence presented
tn the court In the original appeal. had not
been brought out by his counsel. 1t was
shown to the satisfaction of the higher court
that Looney had no preliminary trial; that
be was too I'll to stand trial when his case
was called and the Judge OF the Circuit court
had refused to grant a continuance. There
we're some other points, too. but these were
fufncient TO secure the writ OF error--a step
/, the direction OF new trial for the man
ard as the Virginia Supreme court Is slow to
take any step In the direction of the relief OF
an alleged murderer without unassailable
grounds the Progress may rest content that
there were good and SUFFICIENT reasons for Its
action.
The opinion in the second appeal OF the
Aliens ought to be familiar to the editor OF
the Progress II he reads the Richmond papers
Their counsel asked the Supreme court to do
something not within It's province and that
WAS absolutely without law precedent. and
they had not -&hs saintext idea the court would
grant the writ when they fled the petition
asking for It. Furthermore, the court. EN-.
phaticaily pronounced the so-called after.
discovered evidence as absolutely without
merit. and such as would not have changed
the minds OF twelve reasonable men were tbs
Aliens to have secured new trial ON tht
strength Of IL.
Where the editor of the Progress wal
wrong is In going of at half-cock without frs
Informing himself. when the facts were easii,
cbtainable: using mere coincidence as basi
OF fact for an editorial which ia calculated T.
do harm. simply because he Is an Allel
Hympathizer. such preachments are treadin
% dangerous greand. -s.... ,...: