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

Such the anxiety manifested TO be present al the tra
soday that before the doors opened for the admission
the audience Court crowded persons wh
had obtained ingress through the windows.
The points which the counsel for Mr. sckes presented
for consideration On Saturday were-
Tns.-rhat the government is bound to make out
ease.
SecondThat malice was to be presumed but proved
Third-How far the adultery was be considered pro-
vocation
Fourth--why such crime, under the old common law,
was not murder, but manslaughter
Fith-Wby the extinction of priclegum clerical the
slight burning the hand, which punishment in such
pAses, is taDtamount TO an acquttal.
Sx.h-Wheber the frenzy natural TO husband, under
circumstances of such character, does not operate to
mental unsoundness.
These six points considered on Saturday.
Tie following is the seventh point, which counsel did
not discuss then, but proceeded TO consider to- day
seventh-whether, viewing the of ungo-
vernabe passon-as Of resentment produced by pas
sion-,here sufficient for the defendants passion
for get the better of his transport
Of passion and whether his subsequent acts debe-
rate when the mortal wound was given TO the deceased
Judge Crawford took his the bench at twenty
minutes past ten O'Clock.
The general jury panel called the jurors having
been attend to-day, and the Judge dismissed
them till Monday next.
About twenty minutes after wards Mr.. Sckes was con
Quoted Court and took his in the dock
his sci and Mr. Emanuel Hart having seats near
him.
The jury having been called and answered 10 their
names,
The counsel for Mr. sickles resumed his argument
He Said
He fast approaching the close Of his present duty
there other to admonish him TO do so,
his own exhaustion would be such The interest
he felt in the prisoner be the for the
which he hal imposed upon the Court and jury. He
would briefly recaptulse 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 Sim
ply TO turn US over instincts regulated by the
law of He had suggested that TO the relations
between husband and wife and parent and chd, nature
had created duties of protection which not only
criminal 10 discharge, but which were bound TO dis
charge he had suggested that invitation to a 9
friend neighbor 70 parake OF the hospitality OF his
house implied understanding that all lust upccan-
ness regard his wife daughter would he repressed
banshed from the bosom, and that TO come in the
xuse Of friend while at heart foe constituted al
OF Ihe He had also suggested that wheh
or the wife consented away her chastity or not, be-
tween the husband and the adultsrer, or ravish-
morally speaking, the wife the property Of
the husband, and, against him, possessed nc
dominion her person in favor of another.
He had then considered how the Bible and how the com
mon law garded adultery While the Bible made adultery
20 high a crime 1t fair 10 presume that minds
framed with corresponding perceptons-n other
words that when the Almighty had portrayed adultery
as heinous offence he invested with that quality
OF mind which enables TO look upon II in The same
heinous Light in which he himself had exhibited it. AS
understand the law OF all reasoning, ii is this that
the power which creates the duty gives the ability
10 understand and appreciate it. Counsel referred
what the old judges had said that jealousy is the ghest
rage of man and adultery the greatest provocaon that
be given 10 him In regard to the crimnay Of M
5ckes' act counsel understood the of all
ability the possession of that of reasoning
which enables a man TO the right way and that
amount Of will which enables him 10 pursue it. The in
tnton will is the principle which gives fe to crime
Il impossible TO separate this intention from the
corpus deitcti body Of the offence. Although in
this human being was slain, nevertheless there
not that will intention the part of the
slayer that rendered him amenable to criminal jus
lice. II was matter how the unsoundness of mind
WEE produced, provided it produced Mr.. Sckes
party TO the origin of the provocation which
acted upon him. He stood entirely clear OF the conduct Of
tne aGuerer. lie never Connived al nrSt
niimation he got of the ruling motive which induced
him TO commit the act for which he arraigned.
Counsel had shown that wherever mental soundness was
the question for the jury whether which
produced unsoundness sucien. produce It,
This question bad already been before the learned Judge
the bench He referred TO Judge Craxfords directions
the Jury the of United States against John
Day. There the defendant charged with staying his
wife. The defence get up was insanity, the being
The mor.ncaton OF the prisoner at child being born TO
him within three months after his marriage The Judge
ruled that H. from the evidence the jury found the
a. W the birth Of the child, and the fact OF the
prisoners sepse Of injury increasing in intensity till
his mind became dseaEed thereby; and II, in such pa
roxysms OF eauseltss rage his power Of distinguishing
wss destoyedor superseded, and he committed the act
WIN wbeh he should be charged, be guilty OF
mnr1er-n other words, IL shame upon him TO that
exten. render his mind Diseased he WAS not guI,v
Of MUIR. Shame only one Of the emotions Gro Nd.
ing Nj eohes Mid; that the law which the de.
ts ntcAded 10 enforce on this jury. Counsel aso re-
serred 10 me Honors ruling on the trial Of Dly
WDen the 'nJge had submitted the same propos tons 10
he jury. 'he jury would perceive that the shame Of
having child BORN 10 a under ouch circumstances
could not compare with the mortiHcaton and shame
having mans wife dehowered." The Judge there ruled
r. from shy predieposiDg cause such of mind
pronuced Inc prisoner was not Responsible nor mis- act
he counsel also referred 10 the Judges decs in the
case Of JGrboe, who charged with murder in Staying
She seaucer SITTER Sfurated by the conduct Of the
seiuser, h's brother slew him upon the spot The lcu
cd Judge there said that the statement of facts mads
case Of murder but the OF the prisoners mind al the
time was matter FOR the consideration of the jury I'm
der that instruction the jury held that the brother was ex
cused Counsel asked ia brother who voluntarily az
sumes 10 redress the wrong Of hs sister ST ,nds ex
cused by the verdict Of jury from the con-
sequences Of hs act because the provocaon was too
much for him 10 bear, what principle could difference
ne INDUCED distinction drawn the case OF hna
band nteTcedDg 10 aveDge tho outrage his MARRIAGE
reationsp The question for the jury was tar in the
rosuesion OF this act the mind OF the defendant coo
,dcd With tbs tests7 YOU Bald the counsel can Ems yer
this asestion as men, you Can ausPer Il husbands
and fathers We sed no books here " tell you with
what nfYestons the human mind s enoo6ed; that is
Datter which can be AZ well passed uoon 10 the verdict
gou NAV render 90 y, Nur una.e feelings be
passed upon by you, after any enlightenment which
uight be able to th.'ow upon It, y ~ for you
he SrLfn nj