Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1874-03-26

l. '
er's alleged insanity are not tc
be found in the testimony OF
the witnesses. While it is true
some of the witnesses express
the belief that he was not of
sound mind when he shot his
wife, yet, III every instance they
failed to relate a state of facts,
or circumstances, justifying
such an opinion. On the other
hand, the facts stated, together
with the conduct and declara-
tions of the prisoner, before the
time Of aud subsequent to the
bloody tragedy, satisfied the
jury, and cannot fail Of con-
vincing any mprejudiced mind,
that the prisoner was criminally
responsible for the act.
1t is urged that the fact that
it was his wife who was killed
is an unanswerable argument
against his sanity. That she
was kind and.afectionate, and the
mother of his children-that she
had offered no provocation-and
that when sober he was a mod
el husband. These facts have
been fully considered, with their
due weight, and, unfortunately
for the prisoner, it can not be
denied that he was often cruel
and unkind to his wife. Once
before the act in question, he
shot at his wife with her infant
in her arms, under the roof of
her mother where she had sought
protection from his cruelty. 1t
was not then supposed by any
one that he was insane. On
another occasion he struck her
a severe blow as a return for her
kind effort to lead him home
when drunk on the Streets
His improvidence andprofigacy
forced her to slavish drudgery
to support him and rear their
children. She was gentle, af-
fectionate and forgiving-he
was unkind, untrue and cruel.
With a thousand experimental
lessons of the influence Of whis-
ky upon him, he continued at
intervals to get drunk, and the
most that can be made in his
defense is, that he acGS GntOGica-
ted achen he killed his ar1e. That
he had what is technically
termed mania apOtu or deliriatm
tremenS. | cannot believe that
his mind is more affected than
is usual with men who are
drunk, is not demonstrated by
the proof.
1t is unnecessary to say more.
Drunkenness is no excuse for
crime. 1t is rather an aggra-
vation. While the i'll health Of
the prisoner excites commisera-
tion and sympathy, yet it at-
fords 70 reason for the exercise
of Executive clemency, so as to
save him the ignominy Of fconfine-
ment in the State prison. His
pardon now, before he is con-
signed to a felon's cell, might
be kindness to him and CRATE
ful to his personal friends, but
it might be a great wrong to So
ciety. Drunken husbands, and
drunkards generally, of all So
cial grades, cannot too soon be
taught that they cannot shelter
themselves from crimes that
shock every refined sensibility,
behind the plea of drunkenness.
If fmen, with a full knowledge Of
their weakness and temper, will
persist in. drinking to drunken
ness, let them be taught that
they will be made to feel the
penalties of the law by every
department of the Government.
Every day we are shocked
with the details of crime in the
columns of the press. And it
too frequently appears that
drunkenness is either the imme-
diate or remote cause. And it
is believed that much harm has
been done by a mistaken and
false charity toward this class
of offenders.
1t is a source of regret that
l cannot find satisfactory evil
dence upon which to predicate a
communication, that this prisoner
was insane when he killed his
wife. | wish [ could believe
that his mind did not concur in
the bloody deed. 1t would re-
lieve society of the humiliation
which all must feel, when the
conviction is forced upon us
that men can become so degra-
ded, and so lost to all shame, as
to be guilty of such shocking
-AoC.o - A. ~ooorJ -, 4L;-