Evening star., 1865-07-15
THE MARY HARRIS TRIAL,
PROCEEDINGS YESTERDAY.

After our report closed yesterday the prose
cution called DR.. ]. F. May TO the stand.
Mr.. Darlington stated hypothetical case
supposing young lady of high nervous or
sleep, attacks n friend, tears n quilt, &C. and
asked witness how frequently he had noticed
such symptoms in cases of hysteria or dys-
menorrhpa, and whether from such symp-
toms he would infer insanity
MI. VOORHEES, objected to the question: the
witness should have made study of the sub
JeGt on whleh he proposed TO give an opinion.
District Attorney Darlington said that the
opinion OF DR. Nichols was passed upon certain
hJ pothetical causes and they desired to interro-
gate witness as to causes thot might result from
the physical condition of the party suffering
under the causes named.
MIR. Wilson argued that as DR.. Nichols had
stated the causes upon which his opinion was
based 1t was perfectly proper for witness to
say whether, from his observation of similar
symptoms in other persons, they Were neces-
sarily cause of insanity.
Inc Court here questioned the witness when
he stated that he had opportunities OF Judging
OF the effect of physical diseases upon the
Inind, but he would say he was not an expert
on the subiect of mental diseases He had
never made the study of the mind speciality
he mad studied 1t as much as all educated phy.
sIclans do; but whenever he had q case of in I.
sanity, and it developed itself strong, he did
not attend to ii himself, but put il under the
charge OF those who had made the study of the
mind speciality.
MI Darlington said that the prosecution held
that any educated physician was Il competent
witness on the question of insanity.
Mr.. Voorhees, argued that the term physician
used IN the books when applied to insanity
meant those only who had made study of the
mind.
Judge Wylie decided that the question was
a proper one, and Mr. Bradley took an excep-
uOn
Witness said he did not profess to know more
IMAM any other physician of good standing, but
/ he had never made the subject of the mind a
speciality.
Mr. unohac haro o,,;ootod 20 ,ho .,..>. =. .. -, .
question, and argued that all the facts as de-
tailed by the witnesses should have been stated
Dr.. Nay stated that it was impossible for him
to say how often he had seen cases similar to
those detailed in the question He had seen
cases of dysmenorrhoea occur often without
being attended by hysteria. If the symptoms
indicated IN the question occurred at stated
periods, witness should say they arose from
nervous excitement depending upon uterine
lrrltibllity. He would not say the mind of
person thus affected was not sane but the case
was not one of real insanity
Inc prosec ution here stated another ques-
uon, as TO whether young woman of highly
nervous organization and vivacious temper
ament exhibited the symptoms stated in. the
first questiOn-had armed herself with pistol:
gone to a public building, as, for instance. the
treasury; asked for person: went to the door
OF MS room and saw him; then Secreted her.
self, and as he passed her shot him, inflicting n
mortal wound, and then fired a second time:
made no effort TO escape after committing the
act; did not palliate the crime, and did not
avail herself of the first opportunity: would
these facts OF themselves, or connected with
those formerly stated, indicate whether the act
was an insane act; or could it he accounted for
upon the assumption that it proceeded from an
insane impulse, or that it was impelled by a
purpose of revenge.
This question was also objected to by Mr..
Hughes, on the ground that it was not a med
ical question, but one of fact.
Mr. Darlington and Mr. Hughes argued the
objection. which the Court overruled
Witness stated that it was with great reluc-
tance he gave an opinion as to sanity or insan-
He disliked much to give his opinion on hy-
pothetical case; but in his opinion, if the ante
cedent condition OF the patient was as men,
toned, and the circ umstances had occurred as
detailed, it would not satisfy the mind of wit
ness of insanity in the general acceptance of
the term. This opinion was based on general
abstract question.