The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-01-07
PERSONAL APPEAL
BROUGHT LIBERTY
Continued from First Page,

=
often we are approached by persons
claiming to have evidence, influence.
Or pswer to sell when we have ne
money or disposition TO buy. Hardly
a day passes without fresh attempt
at this continued Patrick, who added
that his brother-in- law, John r "ili-
ken, because of illhealth and adsatlc-
ing years and family misfortunes, Will
not be able 10 continue 10 night as in
the past.
The death OF his father and the ex-
pected death OF his aunt are also men
toned. The plea Is likewise made on
account of his mother, who, he says.
disposed OF all Of her property 10 aid
in his defense. Patrick claimed in his
letter that his enemies had renewed a
newspaper campaign against him, and
said he feared that premature an
nouncement OF the renewal OF his appli-
cation emlght lead my enemies to bring
influence TO bear upon the governor
which would embarrass him TO reject"
though he assures the governor that
no reprisal would follow his action.
After going over the contentious
which he had made In his previous
application, he expressed his belief
. that the governor could do no act
OF more lasting popularity or public
benefit than to declare his belief IN
his Innocence tfs cfHtr1et mat he
did not harbor any thought OF retail
alton against any individual. In ask
ing for an unconditional commuta-
ton" instead of a pardon, Patrick
said that it had been held that an
acceptance of n pardon implied an
acknowledgment Of guilt, and would
bar proceedings TO securing a new
trial or establishing his innocence.
e To Establish Innocence.
Il wish to be free to esta blish my
Innocence in court, and afford the
State an opportunity to try me again
for the murder of Rice" wrote Mr..
Patrick.
In his formal application made TO
the governor a year before. on which
no action was taken, Patrick claimed
that Rice died natural death from
old age, and that the will was not
forged. but was a genuine document
Ife contended that the evidence show
ed that he would never have been
convicted had It been admitted that
the will was genuine, and that IL he
{ wnrp rsssasef4s ne w5sssa. sys' ,st3s IN
prove It's genutnaness IN the courts.
The papers opened today go. back 10
the application made to Governor
HuEneS IN lHUS. IN MS hppifCdtioH
was included a letter from Edgar
r. Bracket 20 the governor, saying:
81 cannot shake off the notion that
an unlimited use OF money forced a
conviction in a case where there was
at least a very grave doubt"
II appears that Lon v. stephens, O
former governor OF Missouri. had also
urged Governor Hughes to take up
the case. The activities OF Clark Bell,
representing the Medico-Legal So
ciety, began with Governor Hughes,
and there are voluminous petitions
and letters from him, ending with an
OTTER to make Governor DIX an homo
rary member OF the society. and a
petition from three thousand physi-
clans is included in the papers.
A letter from William Conany
Church. foreman of the grand jury
which indicted Patrick. says that he
was much dissatisfied with the man
ner at the time in which the indict-
ment was obtained, and had become
thoroughly convinced since that Pat
rick was not guilty OF tho murder