New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-03-08

| lual the great "a
lustration they contain may be summed up
| as follows: ,
| l. All agree that the phrase. IT he shall
| die by his own hand can not be taken
with verbal rigor, since literally 1t would
| include instances OF purely accidental
| death. as the explosion of a gun unskllltully
| handled by the accused for an innocent
purpose. or the taking Of poison under the
| belief of it's being dose OF medicine; while.
| also. the terms literally. would not include
| many instances of even telonious suicide. as
when man deliberately browns himself:
throws himself from precipice, etc
| Wherefore. the common intention OF the
| parties must be sought for. {. e.. 1910, ct
sc 9, and particularly 1915.
,. All agree that there is a breach or the
| contract when the act of sell destruction Is
| committed by :, sane man. who has deIlb-
| erately conyiHced himself that the deed Is
riShtiul or eycusable or even when the
| party. though OF feeble or small intellect.
| has still sufficient powers OF mlnt and reason
| 10 commit a voluntary and w!lllul act OF
>elf-deStruetlon. is able at the time Ito de-
| liberate." ITO know" 10 form a purpose
| and intention" consciously adapt means
TO ends ITO understand the physical con
! sequences" etc.
| s. All agree that 4 the intellectual tacul
| ties become shattered. obscured. torpid
deluded. Subverted, or otherwise insane.
trollin. the will or determining the act.
there is no breach of the proviso
| 1. But they seem to differ with regard to
| the legal consequences of moral or emo
tional Insanity: one opinion being that the
| question whether the party is capable OF
| understanding and approaching the moral
| nature and quality of his purpose is not rele-
| want. and the other opinion being that tins
question must be considered exactly asi
would be in criminal case. so that the
| words OF the provl>o should IN legal
construction be taken 10 except the case of
telonious seltdestruc;ion. and ne other.
| Upon a careful weighing OF the phrase
| ology of the opposing decisions. II VIII DE
| seen that this disagreement consists only III
| the use OF the same words III different
senses one side meaning by the phrase not
| capable of Judging between right ana
| wrong not intellectual incapacity, but Il
| moral ncapacity. resulting from a loss or
corruption OF the moral sense rather than
OF the reasoning faculties-wLile the other
side takes the phrase strictly. argue that
man incapable of discerning right from
wrong is insane has lost his intellect as
well as his morality. can form no intention
and have no will.
Weigh. for instance Oh. J. TynlAls rule.
that the exception only applies 10 feIonl-
Gus" self destruction aud II Will he found
identical with that posted by the lndges
who oppose it: for the criminal law regard
Ing felony makes the same distinction with
regard 10 the exclusion of pastoral excite
ment or moral corruption as they do. Ine
criminal law does not justify or excuse the
man who acts from a corrupt. torpid or de-
based moral sense. SO long as his intellect
ual faculties are strong and clear enough 20
enable him. if he would. 10 know good from
evil. The test of responsibility. in criminal
as well as civil cases. Is the State OF the
actors reason. or ''intelect.' or mental
faculties not that Of his moral sentiments.
Blackstone. vol 1, PIP. II and lSa: Low {.
I7Sl and 1872. Blackstone makes this dis
tinction when he rebukes coroners' iuries
that take the very act of suicide as an evil
dence OF irsauitv-"as if. says he. every
man who acts contrary 10 reason had 10
reason at all" He adds: If it. were evi-
dence OF insanity. the same argument would
prove every other criminal non comp0S Is
well as the selt-murderer.'
Thus. in all the cases. the Judges. without
exception. put their decision on tie cues
ton whether or not the statement ot facts
or special verdict fOften ah>urdly worded( !
showed that tue Selt-Gestreyer had intel
lectual discerntnent sufficient 70 enhghten
and guide his will. Ii rhey could Justly
inter that he had not this amount of ration
al capacity, they concluded - could rot DE
said lie died by his own hand in The sense
these words are used i'll the policy. but II
they found he possessed re;.>Un which lie
might have used, but did no. Use, 70 govern
himself. then no morbid condition arising
from Incorporate or vicious habits. no
mere moral or emotional insanity. OF giving
way 20 furious passion. would be accepted |
10 save The case from the pr0viSc.
Unfortunately. il is TOO true thar men N !
full possession OF their reasoning faculties |
have. in all ages. and in all countries and ,
in nUmberleS> instances. devoted those iacul- |
-. Loo .,..r-
have voluntarily allowed the appet:tes and |
desires 20 become masters. and reason TO
make herself the seryan-. They become !
the vo-arles OF sensuallty. intemperance and |
other disgusting vices, or perpetrators OF
cruel or sordid crimes. Assuming false pre-
misses. and ignoring true ones, they ind
plausible arguments to justify or excuse |
their protlgacv oi atrocity. For instance:
they Use their reasoning faculties 70 defend 4,
suicide, and even raise it TO the rank OF a
virtuous act. The stole philosophy taught
that il was meritorious Celebrated poets. !
thinkers and heroes have committed suicide !
without scruple. Many historical instances.
besides those OF saul. Sappho, Brutus ard |
Cato. might be cited. But neither the fact
OF moral insanity. nor the false philosophy
tina. deduces an apology for passional homi-
eide. or conscious suicide. has ever found /
favor in the laws Of civilized peoples.
Under these premises. the facts 10 be
noted in this case are these: Morse was a
man OF good character and conduct. pleas !
ant manners AMI socable disposition. III |
dustrious and thrifty IN business, iIteli- !
gent and educated. attached 70 and living
happily with his wife and children. He
earned an adequate support for his family
by soliciting applications toy life insurance
CONF anies. He had no vicious habits. had |
met with no serious di>appoinrments IN
life. or losses in his pecunarv affairs OF a
nature 20 induce regret or dependency.
On the contrary. he was hopeful. and in
Gulged in agreeable anticipations On the
fourteenth OF March he wrote an afiec-
tomato letter 10 his wife. telling OF plans
for the future. Of Lis desire to see her and
the children. ana informing them that he
would De at home with them before an an
swer could be returned. On tie sixteenth
he killed himself. There i certainly in
these facts no room Ter any theory OF emo
-ional or pa>sioral insanity.
But on the intellectual side the case IS
different Some months before his death
he received blow on the head. and this
was Colncidenr with an attack Of malaral
| fever. which induced inflammation OF the
membranes OF the brain: From these there
was only partial and trausi1ory recovery.
| He Went out and resumed his OCCUPATION ni-
| his general health was permanently affected.
| His teeblcnes> and eInaciation We're re-
| marked by all his acquaintanceS and. with
! a lew exceptions. they also remarked that
| his mind was wandering. his conversation
| lncoherent. his manner excited and vatll-
| ldtinr. his eyes Ut steady and ul. ring To