The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1869-04-04
The Fernandez Introduction Case.
TESTIMONY CIOsED-DucTuRs STILL DISAGREE

On Friday the testimony in this case was closed
by the Introduction of the additional testimony Of
Drs. FACET, Borde, Bayou and Landry, who had
been commissioned to re-examine the defendant.
Anthony Fernandez. The reports evidenced that
Drs. Borde and Landry were permitted b. Mr..
Fernandez to examine him. but the same privilege
was not allowed to Drs. FACET and Bayon, who
were. however, although admitted by Mr.. Fer
nandez not permitted to question him. DIR. Lam
drys report is TO the effect that bis examination Of
Mr.. Fernandez convinces him that his mental and
physical faculties are perfect. DIR. Borde rays
that although he finds some improvement, the i'm
provement cannot alter materially his first report
to the effect that Mr.. Fernandez, although not in
sane, was not In such mental condition to enable
him to manage his affairs.
DR.. Bayon reports that, although he was not
permitted TO interrogate Mr.. Fernandez, by bis
appearance and in shaking hands with Mr.. F., be
has been enabled to Judge that the paralysis still
exists and that the causes stated BY him his first
report still existed. Dr. further states that,
while he was ip Mr.. Fernandez's garden, he heard
Mrs. Fernandez's voice telling Mr.. F., go gol
Why don't your and soon Afterwards saw Mr..
Fernandez at the balcony, who addressed the doc
tor By telling him doctor, wish you to under.
stand that it was through my own will that yo1
we're forbidden TO examine me"-in manner TO
leave the impression upon him (Dr. Bsyon) that
Mr.. Fernandez did not well know the lesson which
had been taught him.
DR.. FACET reports that he was admitted into the
room Of Mr.. Fernandez, whom he found lying In
bed. Mr.. Fernandez refused to undergo an inter.
rogatory examination. DR.. FACET states, no viewer,
that be saw sufficiently to convince him that no
change had taken place since his first report.
That the facial paralysis and the paralysis OF one
side Of the body still existed and the doctor
maintains the conclusions Of his first report, I. e.
that Mr.. Fernandez is struck with senile insanity.
While DIR. FACET was on the stand during the
crosse Examination by counsel for Mr.. Fernan.
DEE, Mr.. Tissot asked DIR. FACET whether 1t
would be impossible for him 70 be induced into
error. DR.. FACET answered Errdre hunsGnurn
est" and IS be (witness) was part OF humanity,
he fell within the scope OF the saying. Mr.. Tis-
1ot having asked DIR. FACET whether, in the mat
ter of the Introduction of Mr.. Rance. he had not
given q certificate that Mr.. Rance was insane.
DR.. FACET answered that he had not. but that he
had certified to monomania in Mr.. Rance, and
that be still thought his opinion well founded.
Mr.. Tissot then asked witness IL the regret Of
having given the certificate had not rendered DR..
FACET himself insane and caused him to lose
his mind. The witness answered smillngly
that he had not the least recollection OF
#. but that II the counsel would recall some
small facts connected with the question,
he might attempt TO meet them and would
be very happy to be reminded Of such an i'm
portsnt event In his life Of which he had not the
least recollection. The court here intervened
and DIR. FACET retired from the stand.
Mr.. BeTmudez, counsel for Mr.. McClellsnd.
opened the Argument by making brief review
Of the history Of the case, citing point OF law
applicable to It.
The argument of Mr.. Bermudsz rested upon the
reports Of Drs. FACET, Borde and Bsyon, In sup
port of the allegations Of the petition for inter-
diction, Offering three Alternatives against one
negative, the report of DR.. Landry. Also upon
the evidence relative to the marriage OF Mr.. Fer
nsndez, contracted without the advice Of bis family
and sgsinst his will.
The court then adjourned and the case was
continued until Monday, when Mr.. Tissot will
open for the defense.