The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-12-13


those Who employed him but some men often showed
mnds and yet insane The only thing
is that be should have kept his position through
pefsndsnts counsel, Mr.. BARNETT, begged to remisd
the Court that he had been dismissed from his pulpit
The DIs1Rlcr AIroRSr-That 10 not In evidence.
The Judge continued-A strong indication Of insanity
consisted IN loss Of memory, ignorance Of the acts
which he had committed and IL might have struck
them, Il he was insane where could the information
have derived II the prisoner had impaired il to
his cosnsen snd did not that indicate strong memory
Mr. hAREKr assured the Court that the prisoner had
never given them any information or instruction.
Judge am wiling to take that true the counsel
that the absence Of ought mot 60 strong Grimm
nal a. in civil ought not 70 be convicted
.:, .Sss ne
writings and sermons none Of which are produced THE
:ss % 70: IS, shS sssss
ncy Of his writings; the contrary, they good
but when attempting pr ach from his notes be would
30 on upon some other subject incoherently.
Judge-I must, however, after all depend in some
msasure upon these because admiration Of his coun
eel can be tahen and the character given Of them was
Mr. Hadley- The evidence was that he had notes. and
the sermon spoken Of by Nh. Eddy was the only one
The Judge proceeded to observe that these eeccn-
tricites Of marked character they bound
to give him the benefit Of the doubt that they could not
rely upon pces btes. 1t not enough to raise sup
positions that some extraordinary circumstances had
supposticn 1t all; although again. they could not
rely upon one or two, yet By taxing them al
e az. s% s TS
ncoherenciss and uneonnecsd spoken of might
belong to . man. Most OF them had known SUCH
palpahle absurdtes but he did not remember any
very absurd remark delus"n which be had used in
to Be corrected There were some very strange remarks
by him. The Judge here alluded to his declarations that
in the English Language was poem on the sofa Xno-
ther more important and strange his remark upon
Odd Fellowship; upon man who knew the OF
In fhn
q strong deluson; upon the man who could tell the
number Of bricks house by looking at III his decara
ton that lie could denver address upon any subject
gwen at the tme utter poem upon any subject.
He then referred to the strong he had evnced
Their these delusions or whether there was not
some ground for them, as In the cases where he
srs h ne s saa Inc hostility q the dis
party by his writings. Some persons had dread Of
diseases but any existed for their fears
Of insanity. Where IL was entirely deuson and no
existed stronger STILL when the
aris became mania.
The Judge here read the evidence of Dr. Grscom to
whom he paid high compliment but left it to the jury
10 whether his mpressi of the prisoners insanity
could have been strong at the time he himself
fancied now that it had teen-as otherwise IN his Office
connected with the Prison Association he would have
seen that he was taken to an asylum and placed in
safety.
consideration, and that whether there any
to which this extraordinary excitement may DO
appeared by the evidence Of aths the pr
subject to complaints OF the stomach and bowels
and this had strong effect upon his nervous SYSTEM and
OF temperament we're liable 10 great excite
ment and might not Of these acts be attributable
to that temperamens DR.. Grscom told them that Fos
gates cordial which the prisoner in the habit of
taking, contained large quantities of opium; were
not these extraordinary acts to be attributed to that
Another and unfortunate circumstance that
spiriuous liquors. not always or habtualIy but that
he did 1t sometimes to The primer pie
ths-that where there was q cause proved capable Of
he aufor tn 70
than to supposititious one; and therefore, it is
proved that he did liquor, and did Fossate's
FINAL, though sound rule If the sufficient;
1t was question whether they not bound to attr
supposittous We were not blessed with intuition but
We acted upon light suppostions there justi
featou in minds and have not acted upon rule
which we know to be . safe When adopt human
testimony be positive take the
submitted to and the reasonable suppotions whether
in our own minds and in the eyes Of our Maker There
was not single act OF the prisoners life which showed
that he did not know the difference between right and
wrong had he ever shown disposition to the no.
mcidxl mania, and they not justified in considering
the act alone in determining that at the time he had
dethroned either BY insanity intoxication.
conclusion But the whether it by his
act fault folly for II So he responsible Bat
He deprived him Of He absolsed him of response
bity II ntoxcation allowed to be excuse, every
in saety. 1t might mitigate the horror of the deed but
the perpetrator was just as responsible II he WAS
Ills Honor here reeaptuatsd the evidence of some Wit
who had spoken to the fact Of his having been in
the habit Of drinking, but the family that he lived with
had scarcely observed it, and he entitled TO the
benefit Of that On the night In question they dad not
notice that he drunk At tea anything else than
and his pretext however Mr. Camps shop, indica-
ticn Of his thirst for sprtuous liquor He submitted
these remarks to them for their deliberate consideration
n man ahn mt m I'M hath unffl wa
satisfied that he had done the deed with which he
was charged, and in state of mind that made him
Mr.. Barnett, counsel for defence, here asked the
court whether the jury might rot infer insanity from
ner he did, when the saloon was much nearer he
also asked the Court to charge that thoagh voun-
tay drunkenness cannot excuse from the commission OF
crime, yet where, ~ upon charge Of murder,
the question il whether the act was premeditated,
from sudden heat and impulse fact Of the
on or from the uss Of drugs, which habits have caused
Fixed insanity, although the drunkenness which has
the party Is in the same suatisn with regard q crime
that drunkenness had been contracted iuvolunta.
,y a. ast and Y not punishable In support q this
GOES Criminal Evidcnce) The Court refused to charge
the nry in the language dictated BY counsel but con.
BY the long practice Of intoxcaon habtusl axed
insanity caused although this madness contracted
regard to crimes q II had been involuntary At rst
The counsel took AZ exception 70 the REJECTION q the
first stated proposition He also asked them 10 charge
that expressions Of good will towards the deceased might
be taken into evidence Of the absence OF
malice premeditation. To this the Court assented
The jury retired in charge Of Officer It being then
half past one O'Clock and after the transaction Of
business In the Circuit Court the Judge RETIRED express
ing his intention to attend tomorrow ths day. at 10
O'Clock, to receive the verdict. t 80
Supreme Couxt-Gensral Tcrm.
Before Judges Mitchell Roosevelt, and Clerke.
FOREIGN C0RPORATION- PRACrIcx.
Dec. 12.-1As Sedtodvd and Roanoke Company rs.
Ward.-The facts which give rise to the opinion
follows MITCHELL, 1.-THE absolute right Of plaintiff to
dsconnue his action payment Of COSTS at any time
before Judgment or demurrer, before the case
submitted to Jury, has been the law, both OF this
country and Of England from the earliest period this
day, unless the Code has taken away that right II was
allowed in Chaneeyy even whom the cause called
for hearing; although the defendants ready to
the its merits and strongly opposed the
dismissal Curtis rs. Lloyd, 4, Mylne 4 Kerne 1e4)