The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-03-09
The Scannell Case-Disagreemen and
Discharge OF the Jury.

Discharge OF the Jury.
Three weeks have been wasted by the Court
Of Oyer and Terminer in the Scannen murder
trial Late last evening the jury came into
Court, after having been out more than twenty
four hours, with the assertion that they saw
no probability of agreeing upon a verdict
Judge Brady thereupon discharged them, and
sent Scannell back to the Tombs, to take his
chance of another trial after few more months
of delay There was no serious denial of the
killing, as the readers of the HERALD have seen
by the daily reports of the trial. The main
defence was placed upon the metaphysical
question of moral insanity, which was most
deliberately worked out, as though its main
object was to produce insanity in the jury.
For many months the prisoner sought the life
of Donohoe, shooting at him three or four
times and wounding him once before.
He accused him of killing his brother,
Florence Scannell, in fight two years
ago, where the two Scannells attacked
Donohoe and others in political quarrel
From that time the prisoner has frequently
displayed great emotion when his brother was
mentioned, or when he CHANGED to meet Dono-
hoe, whom he had repeatedly threatened to
kill. He showed the Court sample paroxysm
while his counsel was summing up. It is
very doubtful if he produced any favorable
impression. Judge Brady charged the jury
on Friday afternoon. He trusted to their
good sense for correct appreciation of the
evidence, and fully explained the legal defini-
ton Of insanity, the occurrence of which
would deprive the homicide of criminality.
He drew the distinction between unrestrained
passion of malice or revenge and that frenzy
in which reason and moral responsibility are
overthrown and man becomes like o wild
beast, dangerous to friend and foe Yester-
day morning the jury came into Court They
had not agreed, and wished further light on
the subject Of insanity. A clear repetition of
the law on that point was given them from
the bench; yet, after vain endeavor,
they were still unable to agree. 1t is reported
that eight of the twelve had no doubt about
their duty to find o verdict of murder in the
first degree. Four wondered at the stupid OBJ
stinacy of twice their number, and voted for
the proved insanity of the prisoner. This
result is another confirmation of the truth
of an assertion which brought Jack Reynolds
to the halter-that changing is played
out" No other offence is 80 little likely to be
punished in New York as the taking of human
life. 1t may occasion temporary loss of lib
erty, but the chances of its bringing the
slayer to the scaffold are very slim. Society
cannot long afford this practical abandonment
of the penalty for murder. Life becomes
utterly at the mercy of any drunken rufian in
the car or an embittered antagonist in any
feud. Scotland requires only majority of o
jury for conviction. A change of English
law is proposed in the same direction; and
in the New York Assembly on Thursday last
Mr.. Voorhis introduced q bill declaring ''that
after the passage of this act verdict rendered
by two-thirds of a regularly empanelled jury
shall be considered in all criminal cases the
verdict of such jury" Such farce as Scan
nells case has proved shows that our own
statutes might be improved, in the interests
of public safety, by modification of the
rules governing trials for murder.