The Daily Dispatch

[From our special Reporter.]

TRIAL FOR MURDER.

Judge LUCAS P. THOMPSON, Presiding

FIFTH DAY.

Monday, April 18.

Jas. W. Massie recalled for the defence. He stated that he had this morning re-examined and measured the ground of the rencontre, in company with one Campbell of the witnesses They found to the third length pool of the line from the engine house to the pool of blood where the were seen on the ground near McClelland walk, (east side of the street,) to be 33 feet, and that it would pass 5 feet 6 inches from the spot pointed out by Campbell, as that where he saw the third pool. Witness could not see how it was possible for such a pool as that described to have been at the point indicated, and to have escaped his attention. The witnesses to it had generally stated it to have been as conspicuous as any of the pools. He could not see how he could have, by possibility, overlooked it. Question by the prosecution. -Could not fix positively the outline of his range of examination along the supposed line of the fight, but supposed it went within a foot and a half of the point indicated by Campbell, as that where the third pool was. He had, however, looked with more or less care over the whole ground. Dr. Junkin called and testified concerning the wounds of the deceased, and the blood on the ground. On the day after the murder he examined the ground in company with Mr. Massie, Colonel Smith and Maj. Preston. He found only the two pools of blood and that on the hay scales where the body was lifted up out of the street and laid. His examination was prompted by a desire to see where the conflict had taken place, and where the death had occurred. He was directed by Massie in the line of the combat. He described the blood. The Witness.-Was present at the coroner's inquest, and examined the wounds critically, having fortified himself with some physiological reading for the purpose. He investigated the wounds as they were laid open, closely-differed with most persons on the course of that in the back-thought it was struck by an arm which was closely pressed down by an arm of the deceased, and while the knife was so much in line with the back, that it was against the process of the scapula. After this examination, and hearing the testimony, he formed a theory of his own and went down to examine the ground on Tuesday, to see if the facts arranged in his own mind chronologically, could be sustained. He examined very minutely, went up and down and around about, stooping, and closely upon the ground, and saw no blood, except that he had previously described, until he came to the middle of the street, at a point where he had, on his first examination, observed more tracking than elsewhere. Here he discovered, for the first time, in a line from the gate behind the church to the pool near the side of the street, and about the middle of the street, a few splotches of blood, not more than a spoonful.' (This location of blood had been pointed out by no previous witness!) The witness stated that this discovery maintained his theory; he did not say what that was. He had this morning visited the ground, and saw the point indicated by Campbell as that where he saw the third pool. The splotches discovered on this second visit by the Doctor, were five feet distant from that point. Does not think it possible that he could have overlooked Campbell's pool if, as he and others testify, it was as distinctly marked as either of the two large ones. He could have seen it 50 feet distant. By the Prosecution.-True, that most of the remarkable errors in morals and physics have resulted from the formation of theories first, and then suiting the facts to them; but he had certainly in part obtained the facts before he formed his theory about the fight. Dr. Jordan called. He explained a part of his testimony with regard to the cuts in the coat of deceased. They were possibly not all made at the time wounds were inflicted, and some might have been made while the parties were standing up. He further stated that he had reviewed the ground critically, and had seen but two pools-one of them, indeed, was not a pool; it was a stain, without coagulum, spread over a long surface.' This was the blood near the side walk where the parties were seen lying on the ground. Thinks he could hardly have failed to detect other stains, had they been on the ground. Dr. A. G. Davidson called. He also testified to having viewed the ground. Was there at night when the stick was found. A company had a light looking about. Heard them say they found the stick near the scales. He stood on the scales and observed as they moved along. If there was such a stain as that described as the third pool, he thought it strange indeed that he did not see it. Choking would produce great uneasiness and apprehension, and the feeling of impending suffocation would be greatly increased by the weight of a man on the breast, and after a struggle. By the Prosecution--Could not locate the place where the stick was found. Thomas L. Perry-The jailor called. He testified as to Christian's spitting of blood, and to scratches being on his neck just under the left jaw, and there being general redness of the neck; but no bruises. Christian complained very much of his neck. Col. Smith was permitted to make a statement which he had not done when formerly on the stand, as he was then questioned upon particular matters. Upon meeting with Christian after the tragedy, in jail, he (C.) stepped forward and shook him by the hand. He knew the relation he (Col. S.) bore to the deceased, and he remarked that it was a bad affair, and added: I had rather it had been me that died than Blackburn." It was due to the prisoner that he should make the statement. Mr. Davis, a member of the law class, testified to the condition of Christian's throat, when he saw him in jail after the murder. There were impressions of fingers on the left jaw, two or more, and one on the right. At the examining court they seemed to have turned dark, like bruises. Col. Wm. Dillard, of Amherst, testified as to the character of the prisoner. He had known him from his birth; had been a visitor to his (Col D.'s) house; his general character was good; he was a young man of warm heart, of integrity and honor, and good standing generally. Col. Terry Dillard gave similar testimony; he had known the prisoner for nine or ten years; he was a warm hearted, generous, high minded young man; never heard anything against him until this affair, and the rumors connected with it; his family associations were as good as any in the county of Amherst; was not a relation to him, nor was Colonel Wm. Dillard. Samuel Walker gave testimony of the same purport. Dr. McGinnis called,-Was the family physician of Mrs. Christian, mother of the prisoner; his father died many years since Had known him since '46; regarded him an exceedingly agreeable young man, whose habits, tastes and associations were those of a gentleman; had never heard his reputation in the neighborhood impeached; was exceedingly kind and affectionate to his mother and three sisters, who compose the family; his family associations were as good as any in the county. The Defence here rested, stating that other witnesses had been summoned from Amherst, but not having arrived, they would not delay the case. The prosecution desired to introduce other testimony in support of the three pools; but objection was made and sustained by the Judge on the ground that the testimony on that subject was evidence in chief and should have been all introduced at once. No new evidence on the point could be admitted. The prosecution had no other testimony to offer, and the cause came on for argument. The court took a recess. In the afternoon, the argument of the case was opened by Mr. David E. Moore, Commonwealth's Attorney, on behalf of the Commonwealth. The court-room was crowded, and he was attentively listened to. A sketch of the main points made by him is postponed until to-morrow. He would be followed by two of the counsel for the defence-after whom Mr. Michie, of Staunton, would speak for the prosecution. He would be followed by the two other counsel for the defence, and Mr. Moore would conclude. There have been a good many errors in the reports of this case, as printed in the Dispatch, especially in some names. Mr. S. Houston Letcher was printed S. Letcher Houston. Most of the errors could be corrected by the reader. In the testimony of the Doctors, some technical phrases sustained compound fractures which the Doctors, themselves, could remedy. The length of the reports-the haste with which they were necessarily prepared, and the reporter not being present to see the proof-sheets, rendered errors of course unavoidable.