New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-12-26
THE MURDERER's PLEA.
urRrrs AND PHYSICIANS ON QUESTIONS OF
INSANITY.

JURORS IN CASES WHERE THE PLEA OF M
SANITY Is SET UP-A PAPER READ BEFORE
THE MEDICo-LEGAL SOCIETY OF NETWORK
CITY BIZ r. 5. GUERNSEY OF THE NETWORK
BAR.
In relation to trials in courts OF law, when |
he defense OF insanity Is nterposed the question has
been frequently discussed, may say urged by
,hysciAns as the propriety and promotion OF the
,uds Of Justice and humanity of having only
70 pass upon the question instead of common jury az
An other In this discussoa jursts have taken
very little part, feeling satisfied perhaps that the
NV as stands IN England and America In regard
Z, such trials In better form to ascertain the truth
and carry out the design OF all hurnan laws-he protee
non Of socetv-justioe 70 all. In late Issue Of TIE
Jo.g,.aI OF Meatal Science Or. Henry Maudsley, the
wellknovn author. has an article which was repub-
ushed in the August us7O number Of The Popular
Science MonIy that fairly presents the view taken by
physicians on this very important subject BE says;
regard s that physical disease that they alone are
a sard vy,rs genera public give Their opinion ID.
isvsE
The reasons for the law as 1t stands this question
are too little known among all classes Of community
AS she law and has been for centuries, it allows
and calls the help Of experts TO aid In s own due ad
ministrston. This required all questions arising
IN which there is supposed 50 be peculiar knowledge
OF skill any particular vocation, IN any science, or art
or matter requiring superior knowledge This rule Ia
applied questions arising in which the medical profess
sion are supposed have superior knowledge, and In
sanity Of these questions upon which physicians
are allowed to testify to their opinion Of the case
under certain circumstances The principle OF allowing
experts to testify their opinion established the
maxim that "eyery person should be believed IN his
own art"
OPINIONS AS EVIDENCE.
The opinion Of witness is in no evidence TO be
considered by court jury except when the premises
upon which POUNDS his conclusions cannot be under
stood by the court or Jury without study knowledge
he al hfapfO Wit n
edge OF persons whose skill superior 20 their OWL In
order be competent 20 testify as an expert which
qualified to give opinion in courts of justice on
statement OF fact presented extra knowledge OF the
particular science, skill trade, business, or other
matters liring special KnOwedge must be shown
witness this not confined 70 the general
rule he state facts only and leave the conciu
be drawn from these facts 10 be determined by
court or Jury; under OATH he give his opinion
These opinions or conclusions Of Judgment which make
up such opinions Of experts, the same In
substance the verdict Of jury or Judgment OF
court which ia nothing than the opinion OF such
Jury court what established by theacts in the
i ven under the sanction OF an oath There tins diff
ference. IN the two the court or jury IS
under oath while they are making up their opinion upon
facts IN the and these facts upon which the
opinion predlcated are also submitted TO the minds OF
tie counsel and parties The facts were also gwen by
witness under oath, upon which the jury or
court up opinion TO the credihity OF the
witness wen as Of the weight OF hls statements
juyan have no private opinion so far as his yer
taed between the parties and true verdict give. nc
Cordlng the evidence" All he can do Is TO apply ms
general knowledge weighing and applying tue racts
professional opinions as they are presented 10 nn Dy
the several witnesses Tue expert on the other nand
comes results constituting his opinion, which Is TO
ID evidence from his own private study, OBJ
se~vaTon and reelection, and though the facts upon
which as opinion is based may called for by the coun
p5cted thai the jury court will understand them
THE VALUE rHR TESTIMONY or EXPERTS
The opinion Of expert the private Judgment Of the
witness given under oath. Such testimony regarded
az OF great Importance, but from its popularity and the
crude shape under which may before the court
OF jury it received with gresticauticu AS the
kinds Of guards cannot be thrown around the
formation Of the opinions Of expert brought
bear upon jury and the opinions OF experts cannot be
goes this KIND Of evidence is of clear and posi-
tive character OF the value Of that Of facts The gem
er rule Of law a. expOunded by the courts as regras
TIE testimony Of experts is plainly espresso IN nv IAN
ern railroad Company, in n l. Supreme Court s5A Bar
Der. page 256). fOllOws:
non ,s5sets Seeh lie .ithp Toe range Of cOnon o.
IN the case OF the People agt Bodine in n. Y Court of
E-rors DEMO- 2S, the Court held that the opinion
a. o physician Is admissible upon question respect
ing which unproessOnal men can az wei draw eoneu-
lions. Thus, where corpse was found partially
burned aud certain portions Of the body covered with
that the person must nave been oead the ne
out otherwise the covering would have been
OF wilson ait People q Parksr's New-York Criminal Re-
por D. el9 the Court held that she question whether
question for scientific opinion, and surgeon could not
De allowed 20 give his opinion on that point The n T.
p 40 held the opinions of the medical witnesses az
u the position OF the body when struck, inferred from
nature OF wound they had examined, were not
admissible as evidence.
PHYSICIANS on THE QUESTION OF SANITY.
According 70 the rule above stated and illustrated,
should the question Of sanity ESanity OF person be
passed upon exclusively by physciansi This question
may best be answered by nquring into the standard by
which the subject IL to DO measured. This standard
mast be che average man. and hence what call
Nor sense-that is due regard TO the usual institutions
sn Is Tie seat Of she MIND. and that insanity s re-
garded as emanatBg the brain, and hence may DO
o. course olteutimes very difficult decide IN any
gwen whether any marked pecuhary Is the result
or very active and oneded Development OF the oIain
OF actual disease. -
TIE general principles which all decisions Of this
PASSION emotion, or even special aptitude becomes
absolutely ungOvernaoe so as 10 make ls subject re-
hs frends-when, IL were, It absorbs the Whole
urge on 70 Of life and to special deeds that
gre repugnant 70 the average INSTITUTIONS OF tanKlno
lnen have reason 70 suspect the existence OF
ny Although the sentiment and experience OF
he safv Of an iSdvtdaI il is the same standard by
gnicb pivsicsns are 70 Judge OF IT, and the as
thai b Wch they judge that any internal organ OF the
tain whether his patient suffering from Dyspepsia or
cot Obviously only By comparing the symptons that
the patient EXHIBITS ana the feelings OF which ne com
plains with the symptoms and feelings experienced py
the OF persons are free from dyspepss IA
rsfence OF disease all OF the body that are
hidden from actual inspection or pnys e1aminau9u.
cted during life except In cases Of injury
Diseases affecting the brain can, tnssei0Ie. TaT DC
parsons WITH other persona Tue law presumes every
man the consequences OF his own acts, ana
therefore responsible for them.
QUESTIONS TO BIZ DECIDED UNDER rHE PLEA OF IL
SANITY.
The questions to be decided in trials where the defonss