The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1846-09-26
Trial OF Spencer FOR the Murder Of his VIE

In jersey City.
Before Chief Justice Hornblower and Judges John
doSnene' }unr. James MDOnnell, John Griihh, John
w. sPeer' =. van Wrinkle and Geo. c. Dekay.
80 SIXTEENTH
The Court room was as usual crowded to with
est during this trial. and daily filed the galleries and the
inner bar During the time of recess, the galleries
them partook of comfortable de ene in the galleries
talking over the facts connected with the trial
dmr DEFs s concluded a long appeal to the jury
facts brought out upon the trial. concluding by calling
I to ss ss II or
circumstances Of the case-feeng deep confidence in
their determination to acqu the prisoner The Court
here took a
The ATTORNEY GENERAL here rose, and I'M his open
ing remarks said that in this solemn and imposing trial.
that he should appeal to their udgments-no to their
hearts. He " no orator as Bruus Is and should
appeal to is act to WAS plain blunt sRo
model for mother The State Of New Jersey, looked
with deep interest to the result of this trial They
wereto determine whether jealousy: either with or with
out cause would be justification ofmurder He doubt
ed not but they felt the awful responsibility that rested
upon them. They had been asked by of the
sci for the Defence they would dare to find the Prison
er guilty and he would ask in reply, would they dare
to acqut On the July last, deadly aud preme-
ditaed homicide was committed within the precincts Of
their couny-the prisoner at the bar was the person
oscSah n.am ana ,ne ms WE VINO naa oess
admitted the commission Of the deed and set the plea
OF insanity in deienceha is that the prisoner did not
Know what he about and had not his reason at the
time OF the commission of the fatal deed. But could
not have escaped the jury, that jealousy was the excl
nothing to do with the character of the deceasedthey
were not trying the deadbut the lvng-they not
the grave rake the deeds of woman; her deeds
let them be inferred With her bones; she
they too had nothing to do with MIR Richardson his in
ercourse with the unfortunate deceased be it criminal
S an sy 0G I'VE mot to Rs M % by
ers father and his friends they not to the
guilty because they rch and to punish the poor
because they happened to be clothed In RAGS this would
not even be done by New Jersey jury. They would
execute the laws Of New Jersey although the venerable
the amiable and devoted the prisoner should
endeavor to stand between them and the justice of tho
law They would now approach the only question that
was open for their consideration-did they believe
that the prisoner was insane, the time ofthe commits
SION OF the crime their next inquiry should be to the
degree OF insanity, and if they determined upon
this degree of insanity, it such degree as would
was unable to discover between what was right and
what was wrong he next called the attention of
to the Lord Ferrans who was Convicted of
MURDER notwithstanding his wealth and his influence
ne next called their ate nton the of Belngha
ani Others also the case of McNsughton, in England
and went to argue that by the rules common law
they should decide in this case this law based upon
the principle, that he who knows what is right and does
what is wrong, is to be held responsible law was
based upon this principle and they had that
child twelve years Of age had been convicted of the
presumed that every who committed crime was of
sound mind until evidence the contrary which would
Commit
ting 1t, were insane. As regarded the law he would not
dwell further upon that point and he would come to
the question oil insanity that had been raised and first
the hereditary disease in the family They had
shown that the grandfather prisoner had been sub
ject to epilepsy then they would to the father
who proved had been afflicted with the disease un-
til had arrived at the period Of forty years But
in the testimony that had been submitted there
thing to show that the prisoner had inherited
the disease He went on to say that the foundation stone
laid down by the defence to prove hereditary insanity,
was completely removed. He next applied himself to
the question OF prisoners insanity and reviewed the
tmony introduced to support it, They introduced es-
tmeny to show that at Albany the prisoner mad,
and that his eye was CLASSY but yet they had it, that
about this same time he engaged in love and poll
tics, which was enough to make any mad loud
aughter Mr. Sharp testified to facts relation this
point and Miss Sharp here to testify that the pri
soner must have certainly been mad but how did she
support this To support this opinion Miss Sharp said
that the day into the parlor where she
was and without saving any thing to her; and because
he did this he must have been certainly mad Loud
laughter) Counsel next adverted the lectures on
mesmerism delivered by the prisoner, which could not,
sanity. He then referred the testimony of Parson
Day, who If rolling eyes, gloomy looks to
vic man Of insanity he would be very convicted
OF insanity. He would ask, why not the acquant-
and boys who educated with him and brought
up with him brought here to prove he insane He
next called the ntion of the jury nctce which
from long complimentary notice of the mesmeric ope-
rations performed by the prisoner In relation to pr
soners wanting battle at Mr. Strobers baths in New
Jersey while ladies tn IRE, did not prove him to
be insane because there many instances where
ladies and gentlemen bathed together in the bath
and he (the learned counsel had himself less than
fifty times, bathed in the same bath with ladies' Loud
laughter, in which the ladies in the galleries oined)
This was common occurrence
The Court here adjourned to this forenoon, when
counsel will resume his address, at ga o'clock at the
conclusion Of which the Court will charge and the
viii be given to the jury.