Murder trial of J. Samuel McCue

Cover Page - THE McCUE MURDER by James H. Lindsay and John S. Patton., Progress Publishing Company,1904.

Commonwealth v. J. Samuel McCue was a Virginia criminal case in the Albemarle Circuit Court concerning the murder of McCue's wife, Fannie Crawford McCue in September 1904.

J. Samuel McCue resided in the city of Charlottesville, where he had been practicing law for twenty years prior to the commission of the offense for which he was convicted. He was a man of social standing, and reputed wealth. His family consisted of himself, his wife, Fannie Crawford McCue, and four children, three boys and a girl. The eldest of these children was J. William McCue, a boy of about seventeen years of age. Sam McCue had been three times elected mayor of the city — his last term expiring September 1, 1904.

Background

Typical Wall Mounted Telephone, ca. 1902

On the warm summer night of September 4, 1904, 43-year-old Sam McCue (born January 15, 1861) —a member of the locally prominent McCue family— placed a call to the central telephone switchboard at around 9:00 o'clock. According to Miss Virginia Bragg, telephone operator, Mr. McCue broke in suddenly; when she asked him whom he wanted, he gave the name "T. J. Williams." She told him "the phone of Mr. Williams was busy;" to which he said: "Oh, central, do not tell me it is busy; somebody is in my house, has shot me and probably killed my wife!" The ladies at the central telephone office, hearing the dreadful message on the wires, notified the police, who in turn sounded their Whistles. A few minutes later Park Street, in the neighborhood of the McCue home, was crowded with an excited throng.

The crime which resulted in the killing of Mrs. McCue was committed shortly after she and her husband had returned from a late Sunday service at the Presbyterian church, and although the greatest confusion as to the details of the murder at first prevailed, the town authorities were by no means slow in reaching the house. By 10 o'clock the McCue residence was filled with physicians, lawyers and policemen, as well as with relatives and neighbors. To those who entered the house of the ex-Mayor that night it did not seem that the husband was badly hurt, though he complained loudly of his injuries. Nothing, however, could induce him to take opiates or medicine of any sort.

The first person to reach the house was Dr. Frank O. McCue, a brother of J. Samuel McCue, who was a practicing physician in the city, and resided three and one half or four squares off. At the behest of Sam McCue, Dr. McCue and John Perry, a colored boy, who occupied a servant’s room, started up the steps to the second floor to "find Fannie." About that time Policeman D. C. Grady arrived and came up the steps. Fannie was found in the second floor bathroom of the family's home, lying in the bathtub. She had been struck on the head and shot in the chest with a shotgun at close range. The warmth had hardly left the body, and it was evident that Mrs. McCue had been dead only a few minutes.

Sam McCue reported that at the time of the killing (around 9 p.m. it was later determined), he and his wife had been preparing for bed when he saw a man in the mirror as he (McCue) was standing in front taking the buttons out of his shirt; that his wife was then in the bathroom; that he went and got his gun, put two shells in it and started to the door, but when he got to the door he was struck and knocked senseless.

The accounts he gave of the affair were confused and somewhat conflicting. All he could say was that he and his wife, while undressing, had been attacked by a “dirty looking white man,” and that he had been knocked senseless. He did not appear to know whether his wife was dead or not. Several windows in the house were found open—a fact indicating burglary in connection with the crime.

Murder

Early 20th century Sears, Roebuck & Co. Inc. Clawfoot bath-tub

Charlottesville Presbyterian Church. It stood on the southwest corner of E. Market and 2nd St. NE.

On September 2, 1904, Sam McCue left home on a trip to the city of Washington, and on the same day his wife Fannie, went out into the country, about seven miles from Charlottesville, on a social visit. About five o’clock in the evening, on Sunday, September 4, 1904, Mrs. McCue returned to her home. About an hour later, on the same day, her husband returned from Washington. When he reached home his wife was in the parlor entertaining a guest. He did not go in to see her, and the record is silent as to the character of their meeting, or whether they did meet prior to the evening meal. Shortly after supper Mrs. McCue went, unattended, to the Presbyterian church, several blocks from their home. Soon after that J. Samuel McCue also went to church and occupied the family pew, together with his wife. The services at the church seem to have lasted about one hour, and Mr. and Mrs. McCue returned to their residence about 9:15 o’clock. The weather was warm and the windows and doors of residences were open for purposes of ventilation, and many persons were sitting on their galleries.

Trial evidence - Diagram of 2nd floor of McCue's residence

After Mr. and Mrs. McCue entered the house they prepared to retire, and the details of what took place in the next few minutes is unknown. There were in the house at this time, Mr. and Mrs. McCue, and John Perry, a colored boy, who occupied a servant’s room on the second floor of the rear part of the house, which was shut off from the main residence by a hall door generally kept locked. The son, J. William McCue, was in the city of Charlottesville, but had not then come in, nor were any of the other children in the house.

Dr. Frank O. McCue says that the first intimation that he had of any trouble was about 9:15 or 9:30 p.m. on September 4th; that he and his family had gone up stairs to retire, and that he was nearly undressed when the telephone rang; that he went to the ’phone and recognized his brother’s voice, who said: “Frank, come down right quick, somebody is in the house, has knocked me senseless, and has probably shot "Fannie." Dr. McCue says he hung up the receiver quickly, went to his room, dressed, with his wife’s assistance, and started to his brother’s house. As he started out he asked his wife for his pistol, but recalled that he had loaned it. He went to his brother’s house, went up the front steps, and, finding the door ajar, pushed it open with his emergency grip. The first person he saw was the colored boy, John Perry, going from him toward the stairs. He did not take off his hat, and kept his grip in his hand. There was a low light in the hall. He met his brother on the steps, a little above the center of the stairway. There was a dim light in his brother’s room on the upper floor. His brother, J. Samuel McCue, had on a pair of dark trousers, a pair of slippers and an undershirt. There was a wound on his brother’s right cheek, and some blood on the right side of his face. He did not reply to several of Dr. McCue’s questions, but seemed dazed, and would give no definite history of the case. He pushed Dr. McCue back, and said: “Go on and find Fannie.” Dr. McCue went up the steps, put down his grip, took matches and struck a light. About that time Policeman D. C. Grady arrived and came up the steps before Dr. McCue made the first light. There was an odor and fumes of powder in the upper hall, and water running in the bathroom at the rear end of the hall. Going into the bathroom, he struck a light, and asked John Perry, the colored boy who was with him, where the gas jet was. Perry said behind the door. After lighting the gas jet, the first thing he saw was the body of Fannie McCue, wife of J. Samuel McCue, lying in the bath-tub. She was pulseless and lying almost stretched out — right leg drawn out against the base of the tub, and left knee raised, with her gown floating above her body. The water was within four inches of the top of the tub, but did not cover her. Her mouth was partially open, but no water had entered her body. There was no discoloration of the water. She was lifted out of the tub by Dr. McCue, Grady and John Perry, and laid on a rug on the bathroom floor.

Autopsy

The initial examination was made by Dr. J. E. Early and Dr. Venable. The Attorney for the Commonwealth later that night requested Dr. Early return to the McCue's residence and make a more thorough examination with another physician. Dr. Early called upon Dr. Venable and, accompanied by Dr. McCue, made a more thorough examination of the body and the bath-room. There was a rug on the floor, and that and the floor were saturated with water. This examination was between 12 and 2 A. M. Monday morning. According to Dr. Early's, they did not look under the bath-tub, as it was wet.

At a post mortem examination held during the night of Sunday, September 4, 1904, there was found on the deceased an incised wound on the nose, from which a small amount of blood had flown, but no bones were broken. The right ear was cut almost in two, as if a lick had been struck from above downward and backward. It skinned the ear, and cut it in two for a short space, perhaps one-half an inch. There was a marked contusion on the front and back of the ear. The wound was such as might have been made by a baseball bat, and would probably have produced insensibility. There were finger prints on her throat — four on one side and one on the other — as if she had been choked. These could only have been made during life. On the back of the head there was a slight out — perhaps a quarter of an inch — which might have been made after death by falling into the bath-tub, and there was a gunshot wound in the chest, which went in practically solid, and must have been made at close range, as the wound was full of powder. The physicians who made the examination were of opinion that the gunshot wound produced practically instantaneous death. They were also of opinion that Mrs. McCue could not have gotten into the bath-tub, in the position in which she was, after receiving that wound, and that the range of the wound was such that it was impossible for it to have been made while she was lying in the bath-tub.

Coroner's jury

Early in the morning of the day after the crime, a coroner's jury over which Dr. W. D. Macon presided, was sworn in to investigate the killing. This body, which at first sat at the McCue house behind closed doors and subsequently in the city hall, was composed, for the most part, of men living in the immediate neighborhood of the crime. After the stenographer had typewritten the depositions of the many witnesses, each deponent was allowed the privilege of correcting mistakes appearing in the transcript and of amplifying his language. McCue gave several hours to this work and studied his own evidence with the utmost care. He made many inter-lineations and also copied off and prepared anew five pages of questions and answers.

Media coverage

The McCue Murder Trial in 1904, sparked one of the most involving murder trials in the City’s history as chronicled almost daily in the headlines and features of the local newspaper, The Daily Progress. Each edition typically operated on a 24-hour news cycle. The court, in the presence of the prisoner and his counsel, and without objection on their part, at the instance of the jury, permitted the jury to have access to newspapers under instructions that "they shall scrupulously avoid reading any parts of said papers that have reference to the trial."

The first suspect

A story of the murder of Mrs. McCue, which found its way into the public prints two days after the trial of the ex-Mayor began, involves a man at one time suspected of the crime, whose escape from arrest and possible summary punishment was almost by accident. He was at church at the time of the murder, yet going to church was not one of his strong habits. There is a woman, also, indirectly involved in this story of the early suspect, but of that later.

A tangled web

Sam McCue gave various accounts as to what had happened.The prisoner gave various accounts as to what had happened. To one witness, among the first to get to the house, he said: “A burglar has shot and killed Fannie, and has escaped,” and when asked about the slight wound on his face, replied: “The rascal must have shot me too.” When his son William arrived he said: “Your mother is dead — a burglar has killed her.” He said to Policeman Grady that some one had nearly killed him, and had probably killed Fannie. He further said that he was “undressing when he heard a rattling, and looked around. He saw a dirty, greasy man, as if a railroad man. He reached for his gun, but the man got hold of him before he got the gun and got it in position.” They had a tussle before he was knocked out. He stated that his wife was in the room when the man came in. To another witness he said that he heard a noise in the hall and went out and grappled with the man; that he backed away from the man, and went and got his gun. As he returned with the gun the man knocked him down and got the gun. To another witness he stated that some one had entered his room, knocked him senseless and shot his wife. He said he was in front of a chiffonier and his wife near the bureau; that he tried to get his gun out of the case when the man knocked him senseless and took the gun. To another witness he stated that his wife was prepared for bed, and that he had on his undershirt; that the lights were turned low; and that he heard a sound' like a click and turned, and saw a man; that he went to his chiffonier where he kept, his pistol, but the pistol had-been removed; that he reached for the gun which was in the corner. When he got the gun he was struck by a bat or some object, and he knew nothing further after that.” At a later time he stated to another witness that he saw a man in the mirror as he (McCue) was standing in front taking the buttons out of his shirt; that his wife was then in the bathroom; that he went and got his gun, put two shells in it and started to the door, but when he got to the door he was struck and knocked senseless. He described the man as a dirty, greasy looking white man. The testimony of the prisoner at the coroner’s inquest was not introduced on his trial.

Arrest and Arrangement

On Tuesday, September 6, 1904 Fannie McCue was buried. The following day, Wednesday afternoon, September 7th, Sam McCue was arrested on a warrant charging him with the murder of his wife. Sam McCue was arrested at 5:20 p. m. Wednesday, September 7th, on a warrant charging that he "did willfully, deliberately and premeditatedly kill and murder Fannie C. McCue, his wife, in violation of a statute of Virginia.” The arrest was made by officers Dan C. Grady and A. N. Eubank. These officers served the warrant sworn out by Commonwealth's Attorney Frank Gilmer, and issued by Acting Police Justice Archibald D. Dabney, who was sworn in by Police Justice Edward O. McCue, who naturally desired to avoid the performance of the unpleasant duty of issuing a writ for the arrest of his own brother.

Trial

The trial began October 18, 1904, at the Albemarle County Courthouse in Charlottesville, Virginia, with instructions from the judge and opening statements from the prosecution and defense.

Defense case

The theory of the defense was that the husband had been struck with a sand-bag, or something of that kind, and knocked senseless, and afterwards the wife had been shot, and that this had been done by some person, either for the purpose of burglary or for revenge.

Testimony

J. William McCue, the prisoner’s son, was offered as a witness on behalf of the Commonwealth. Soon after his examination began, counsel for the Commonwealth announced that they were taken by surprise by the prisoner’s testimony, and asked to be allowed to examine him according to the rules applicable to cross-examination, and this request was granted.

Trial evidence: Shotgun and baseball bat

Just outside of the bathroom door, in the hall, there was found a pump gun, which was identified as belonging to the prisoner. This gun was picked up by the negro boy, John Perry, who ejected an empty shell from the magazine. Just inside the bed-room, standing in one corner, was found a baseball bat, which was identified as belonging to one of the boys of the family. This bat had stains on it at the large end which appeared to be blood. Ho blood stains were found in the bedroom, nor in the hall leading therefrom to the bath-room, although diligent search was made therefor. Numerous blood spots were found on the prisoner’s undershirt, a number of which had been washed, or had at least come in contact with water.

Mrs. McCue wore her finger-nails long. One of these was found broken and turned back. Screams of a woman were heard by one witness in the McCue residence, and later a shot. The prisoner gave no alarm, but called a lady over the ’phone, and also claimed to have called in the same way his brother, Dr. McCue, but the latter was questioned by the Commonwealth. The first alarm was given from the central telephone office. Nothing was stolen from the residence, and there was no other evidence of attempted burglary.

The physicians also gave the prisoner a thorough examination, but could find no wounds upon his person, except an abrasion of the skin on one side of his face, such as a boy would receive from scraping his knee against a brick, or such as usual with football players. They expressed the opinion that this could not have been caused by a lick from a baseball bat, and, by whatever instrument inflicted, it would not have caused unconsciousness. His scalp and body were carefully examined, but no other wounds or bruises could be found upon him.

J. Samuel McCue's longtime coachman William Hurley also provided a testimony during the trial that both highlighted specific personality traits of the man and described his behavior in the days immediately following the murder of his wife.

Marital issues

There was evidence tending to show that the domestic relations of the husband and wife had not been pleasant for several years past. There was also evidence, however, tending to show the contrary, and letters of both husband and wife of the most affectionate kind, during the years 1899 and 1900, and one as late as 1901, were introduced in evidence. It also appeared that the husband carried upwards of $60,000 of insurance on his life, payable to his wife, if living at the time of his death. Most of these policies were taken out during the two or three years immediately preceding the murder — one of them for $10,000 in the year 1904.

Sentencing

ALBEMARLE COUNTY JAIL, Window of McCue's Cell to Left

Circumstances strongly pointed to the husband as the murderer of his wife. Subsequently, he was indicted, tried, and convicted of the offense. The time for the execution was fixed for January 20, 1905.

On November 5, 1904, Sam McCue was found guilty of the murder of his wife, Fanny McCue, on Sunday night, Sept. 4 last. The verdict was murder in the first degree, which carries with it the death penalty. The jury deliberated less than half an hour. The verdict was broadcast across the United States to major newspapers. After the verdict was read by the judge, the defense asked for another trial on the grounds that jurors read newspapers.

Those Who Figured in the Trial

Condensed Biographies of the Most Prominent Persons Connected with the Case.

The Lawyers and Court Officers

• Archibald D. Dabney, Acting Police Justice (Police Justice E. O. McCue, brother of J. Samuel McCue, recused himself)
• George Watts Morris, Judge of the Corporate Court of Charlottesville
• C. W. Rogers, City Sgt. of Charlottesville
• Capt.Micajah Woods, associated with Commonwealth’s Attorney in Prosecution
• Capt. Richard S. Kerr, assisted Commonwealth Attorney
• Frank Gilmer, Attorney for the City of Charlottesville
• G. Burnley Sinclair, Counsel for the Defense
• Daniel Harman, Lead Counsel for Defense
• J. Tinsley Coleman, Counsel for Defense
• John. L. Lee, Leading Counsel for Defense
• George L. Hart, Stenographer
• James J. Thomas, Jailer

Spiritual advisors to Mr. McCue

• Rev. G. L. Petrie
• H. B. Lee
• J. B. Thompson

Publications

By 1900 major newspapers had become profitable powerhouses of advocacy, muckraking and sensationalism, along with serious, and objective news-gathering. Newspaper editors and publishers at the time made a point of disavowing any moral dimension to news writing and insisted that they were simply bringing to light things that were hidden.

The McCue Murder Trial in 1904, sparked one of the most involving murder trials in the City’s history as chronicled almost daily in the local newspaper, The Daily Progress. A subsequent publication, “The McCue murder: complete story of the crime and the famous trial of the ex-mayor of Charlottesville, Virginia” was published by reporters James H. Lindsay and John S. Patton shortly after the case reached its conclusion in 1905. The original trial records, including a diagram of the murder scene, were available in the records room of the Charlottesville Circuit Court until renovations in 2020.

In 1900, newspapers shared news with one another. The Daily Progress provided sordid, trivial and important details of the trial to several larger Mid-Atlantic publications by telegraph and telephone.

The case also received newspaper coverage throughout the United States, including an article in the New York Times with the heading: "CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va., Feb. 10. -- J. Samuel McCue, formerly Mayor of this city, was hanged in the county jail here at 7:34 o'clock this morning for the murder of his wife on Sunday, Sept. 4, 1904."

Supreme Court of the United States

Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company v. J. William McCue, et al. (February 19, 1912)

Argued December 20 and 21, 1911.; Decided February 19, 1912. The question in the case is whether death by the hand of the law in execution of a conviction and sentence for murder is covered by a policy of life insurance, though such manner of death is not excepted from the policy, there being no question of the justness of the sentence.

Folk culture

The lengthy trial and appeal impacted many in the city of almost 6,500. The murder has remained a topic in Charlottesville’s popular culture.