The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-04-12
THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT.

Such is the anxiety manifested to be present al the trial
oday that before the opened for the admission Of
the audience the crowded BY persons who
had obtained ipgress through the windows
The points which the counsel Tor Mr. scxes presented
for consideration Saturday were;-
Firs.-rhat the government is bound to make out
sase.
secondrat malice not to be presumed, but proved
Third-How far the adultery was TO be considered pro-
vocation.
Fourh--why such crime, under the old common law,
Wns not murder, but manslaughter.
Ffth-wby the extinction of pricilegum clerical, the
slight burning IN band, which punishment in such
sases is taptsmount TO an acquitta
Sixh-Wbether the frenzy natural 70 husband, under
circumstances of such character does not operate to
mental vnsoandness.
These six points were considered on Saturday.
TIE following is the seventh point, which counsel did
not discuss then, but proceeded 10 consider day
Eeventh-whethes, viewing the one of ungo-
verpabe passon-as Of resentment produced by pas
sonheye sufficient time for the defendants passion
for TO get the better of his transport
II passion whether his subsequent acts debe
rate the mortal wount given TO the deceased
Judge Crawford took his seat the bench at twenty
minutes past ten O'Clock.
The general jury panel called, the jurors having
been to day. and the Judge dismissed
tAem till Monday next.
About twenty minutes after wards Mr. Sckles was CON
Quoted Court and took his seat in the dock, Of
his sci and Mr.. Emanuel B. Hart having near
him
The jury having been called and answered TO their
Names
The counsel for Mr.. Sckles resumed his argument.
He said
he was fast approaching the close Of his present duty
bis own exhaustion would be such The interest
he felt in the prisoner be the for the tax
which be hal imposed upon the Court and jury He
would briefly recapitulate the arguments which he
had submitted He had shown that human law
did not reach all Of wrong; that the
omission 10 provide against this wrong was sim
ply to instincts as regulated by the
law of He had suggested that as TO the relations
between husband wife and parent and child, nature
had created duties OF protection which was not only not
criminal 70 discharge but which we we're bound to dis
charge. BE had suggested that invitation TO a mans
friend neghbor to partake OF the hospitality OF his
house implied understanding that all lust upceau-
ness in regard his wife daughter would repressed
or banshed from the bosom, and that TO come in the
xuise Of friend while heart foe constituted alb
of The license He had also suggested that wheh
or the wife consented away her chastity not, be-
tween the husband and the aduitsrer, ravish-
CT, the husbands rights were the same; that,
morally speaking the wife was the property Of
the husband, and, as against him, possessed 10
dominion her person in favor OF another.
he had then considered how the Bible and how the
mon adultery. While the Bible made adultery
20 high a crime it fair 10 presume that minds
were framed with corresponding perceptionsin other
words that when the Almighty had portrayed adultery
rs 70 henous al offence invested with that quality
Lob, tn
heinous light which he himself had exhibited IT, AS
understand the law of all reasoning, it is this that
the power which creates the duty gives the ability
70 understand and appreciate it, Counsel referred
what old judges had said that jealousy is the highest
rage OF man and adultery the greatest provocaton that
be given 10 him Ia regard to the crimnaty Of NJ
Slles act counsel understood the basis Of all
ability to be the possession of that amount Of reasoning
which enables q man TO see the right way and that
amount Of will which enables him TO pursue it, The in.
tenton will Is the principle which gives lfe 10 crime
II WAS impossible TO separate this intention from the
corpus delicti or body of the offence. Although in
This case human being WIS sain nevertheless there
was not that will intention the part of the
slayer that rendered him amepable 10 criminal JUS
lice II was matter how the unsoundness of mind
wss produced, provided it produced. Mr. 5ickles
vas party 10 the origin of the provocaton which
acted upon him He stood entirely clear OF the conduct
the adulterer He had connived at IT, and the first
intmation he got Of the ruling motive which induced
him 70 commit the act for which he arragned.
Counsel had shown that wherever mental soundness was
pet the question for the jury whether which
produced mental unsoundness sufficient produce
This question bad already been before the learned Judge
the bench He referred 10 Judge Crawfords directions
70 the jury In the of the United States against John
Day There the defendant was charged with Staying his
tnas nftt thac ba,c
the modification OF the prisoner at child being born
him within three months after his marriage. The Judge
raled that from the evidence, the jury found the fact
the birth Of the child and TO the fact of the
prisoners sense OF injury increasing in intensity I'LL
his mind became dseased thereby and IT, in such pa
roxysms or causeess rage, his power Of distinguishing
was destroyed or superseded, and no committed the act
with which he should be charged, be guilty Of
murLerin other words IL shame acted upon i'm 10 that
extern render his mind diseased he was not guilty
of murfer. Shame only Of the emotions Gro wd.
ing Mr.. 9ckles miad that the law which the de
fence intended to enforce this jury also re.
serred TO hs Honors ruling the second trial OF Day
when the Judge had submitted the propos lions 10
the jury 'the jury would perceive that the shame
having child born 70 a under such circumstances
could not compare with the mort6cation and shame
having mans wife deiowered" The Judge there ruled
IT, from shy predisposDg cause such state OF mind
produced the prisoner not responsible nor his act
The counsel also referred 10 the Judges decision in the
of Jsrboe, who charged with murder in Staying
She sedueer Of bis SITTER ffurated by Of the
seussr ,ns brother slew him upon the spot The c nm
cd Judge there said that the statement of facts made
case Of murder but the state Of the mind the
time vas matter for the consideration OF the Jury IN
der that instruction The jury held the brother was ex
cascd Council asked ifa brother, who voluntarily az
snDes 70 redress the wrong Of hs sister stinds OK
cused by the verdict Of Jury from the con.
sequences Of hs act because the povocaton WAC too
ncb for him 70 bear, what principle could difference
&c INDUCED a distinction drawn the case az a hos
band nercedng 70 ave1ge tho outrage his marriage
relstons9 The question for the Jury was far 10 the
rop<nison O. this act the mind OF the defendant co,n
..dcd With b, testsf YOU sad the counsel Ems yer
th,s asestion as men you oBn answer az husbands
ana fathers We Dsed no books here " tell you with
what affections the human mind endosed; tnat is
xatter which can be well passed 10 the verdict
you nav render on yur own sunale feelings as he
ps,sed upon by you, after any enlightenment which