New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-12-26

somlsds asts r.dSs SseS1Iol.Ss aOs:. l.s
or'sulssf' Evidence sal
WHAT QUESTIONS EXPERTS NAY ANSWER
The only insanity that the law, above stated recog
Mics for crime been termed "intelse
tual insanity Taylor's Med. Jurisp) In McNaghtenb
case 40 Clark Fin, 7iO; also Gresnlears Evidence.
s7s) the House Of Lords, among other questions re-
atlng this subject propounded 20 the twelve judges
Of England the following question
Can Medical disease o. insszy Who never
sSo. .Ss ths examination N tie Witnesses 5. ai.
70 the sts o. the prseRsr end At the ms a ne commission ~:
time Of doing the act that be acting contrary n law or whether be
The question answered by Chiefyustce Tindal IN
which all the other judges eoneurred INT justice Maue
We under the dresps..n.s uppc,.d e.nDo.
q % s'1 ~ "a. s sS a and d. a. .
70, ggSs matter .:1s rS sHss inch ,sses:
cusstoa Secp saOs.sHasy emily
. allow tSs qsssOn pu us. rsaai 'rS AOugs DE
The rule is and the N Y. Supreme Court have so held
that "a medical witness give his opinion GU hy-
pothetca statement Of facts, and 10 viii be for the Jury
70 Judge wasther the 90 seated correspond
In the ease Of the Peopleag Lake ga n. Y, p ss tho
sse. .ho IA. been pr...s, toss o. vAsI. TIA. "a
- eei a. ae 1890 ~. ~ ~ ~ % ~ - a
Of the commission Of s.sg.i ocenss Il sseA
.ss. nusi upsn the Of .rdens Which ).
): nsy ): ssd whether .Fpe.ness psoms
@ . Is !, nov ~ issop n INSANITY Questions Of M, nature can
blending @.' Of science With ibos q Fact
o. Enghah American .dth;is. cited IN support Of :s
disease insanity bad sni pevSus opportunity BY his
SSsaranss Of The accused upon .aiSo mar
Eens. qOSson and give bis Ogon A. 70 The ANTI or INSANITY tho
70 jury and canstahee and a. the ds Of conduct
formed his oo5eiurioa Questioned
. and Ss opportunity . Ascertain the stat: Of the p.oa
mind and has ne1 opinion thak tb opinion mAJ DO sv
witness not professional expert is not competent
s1 59ysua Wss sane or insane though when exam
med what he himself witnessed in regard TO such
mind by 1' what be observed a. Y Court Of Appeals
O,Brien agt People 96 N T. Gs Capp agt Fullerton, 81
which opinion is formed that the jury can judge
Of R FGs Taue end. o. f Rsmber ag Tryon sere
Rawie. Penn, 9Oi Capp agt Fullerton. "a ~ u 1901.
What prop. questions TO b. Submitted tn. jury whom
55 :sS: EXAMPLE. az PTn S 5 sS'Is T p I
s .s. Of ,.s pS . %s Psss gi present ss
u % 9 & 9 sfs ss aT SSSn a sss
on They deem # AID At dsassroS.
Sais spplestons principle.
@ ne sst va one which he ought no, to do ana that act n.
contrary the law Of The land be Is punishable and the uiSs
party had suen degree Of knew It he doing
course think accompanied
viii sSh observations AID explanations the Circumstances Of each
particular may require
THE DUTIES OF EXPERTS.
AID expert must have some extra knowledge this must
appear by his statement. under oath, but the degree
Of skill that be have practically in the hands Of
the Jury they TO weigh his opinions, that
given by him. In connection with his proved standing in
his profession 1t therefore very important that each
Der allowed 10 be examined on each side equal and is
the The opinion Of one expert
as 20 whether certain state OF facts was enough 70
justify another expert IN the formation OF an opinion is
not admissible People agt Hartu1g II How, n y p
doubt TO tie insanity Of person Sanchez ag People
The duty and responsibility Of an expert questions
Of insanity is very important 70 the comm UNITY, sad
medical profession and the general public Physclsns
mostly inclined 20 excuse many wrong acts OF indi'
vid1as grounds OF disease In their arGumenrs
against the present mode trial they claim that many
persons aow convicted Of crime when they should
only be treated for disease (see the article by Dr. Mauds
Lreat degree perhaps, 10 tase the opinion Of physi
OF an individual and none will called for the accused
unless he will so testify This Ia hard to overcome By
tanned al hehf Of the etasO. aud Il there any
the accused the benefit OF the doubt-thus practically
refusing to decide !" when doctors disagree"
There is question that arises In the administration
Of the law where expert testimony may be less neoes
eary and where it should be less controlling On che jury
and where tbs common observation and experience OF
should more prevail over all theory, than IL Gases OK
alleged insanity.
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF JURIEs
very great They have the power TO acqu the accused
without regard 70 the evidence the judge charge
md the only restraints upon such verdict in tho United
States are their OVID feelings aud regard for public
opinion and proper Of the general welfare aud
safety Of the community. That well known constltu.
tiOna provision founded by the common law that no
person shall be subject for the onse 70 be twice
put in jeopardy OF NE or limb" prevents another tral
any review by writ of otherwise OF the
Of court or jury. when person Il tried for crime
aud found mot guilty" II he is found guilty, he
have of
has no right 20 have review OF verdict Of
nns as to the oense for which the accused tried
People agt Corning an Y Reports, p g. Blackstone
be regarded as the barometer the moral aud
general intelligence OF the community which they 70
present and are morally bound TO protect ANY and
every tried by jury for any crime beyond Pett
larceny may De SegnIsteq on t9o e e % o n
wrong which latter theory was introduced 1nto medical
writer's aud not by jurists or Legislators of Late,
moral insanity Of the jury would seem TO be the most
proper verdict which the public should pronounce on
some OF their acquittals.l The defense Of " moral
insanity" has nOminauy, had very poor success. IN
attempts to murder under certain circumstance, tho
plea OF insanity has met with considerable sue.
years, and II II would be more 30 n placed
Sssadp its nmsdate results by taeresse of crime
might more strikingly show the absurdity OF mder
the danger 10 The community Of allowing murderer
afterward at large under any circumstances-not
so much protect society from the person. but
example TO deter othershrom giving way to similar
impulses
any change is suggested IN ii present mode OF trial
by jury In criminal (which il guaranteed Oy
constitutional proys0n the question OF insanity should
be taken from legally irresponsible jury and III a1
placed in the hands OF responsible judiciary, with
the same rules OF evidence as Sc present.
The above paper will be discussed at the regular
monthly meeting OF the MedcoLgal Society 20 DO seit
this evening the College Of Physicians eni Surgeons
Fourth-ave. and Twenty-thirt-st-ksl
=
INDIAN AFFAIRS IN TEXAS.
70 tAs Edttor OF Ths Tribune.