Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1875-04-15


before? No chain il stronger than its
weakest link. In this chain formed By
the State link is wanting to connect
the accused with this act. Suppose,
however, you take a different view of
this case and think, beyond reasona-
BILE doubt, that the prisoner is guilty,
then it is not clear TO me that be should
be punished. Criminals must act ma
laciously, and must have sufficient dis
erection about them to know the respon.
sibility Of their acts before the law will
punish. They must know the distinction
between right and wrong. Menare pun
ished for crime when they have discre-
tion about them and commit the crime
nalicicusly. The medical books put
down many kinds of insanity, and their
exciting causes. Any arrangement of
the emotional faculties is considered in
sanity, and an act committed by an ir-
rangement of either the intellectual or
emotional faculties, is not punished by
the law. There are MANY kinds of ma
MIA, Homieidal, Suicidal, Kleptcmania,
Pseudomania, Pyromania, and many
others. Every propensity and impulse
in the human heart, If excited to
extremes, may develop into insani-
ty when so excited. The impulse is
irresistible to commit some act-he is
captive TO his passion and cannot resist
it. in this case was there not an excl
ting cause? He was laboring under the
passion of love, the greatest passion in
the heart, and could not resist its force,
and in a fit of desperation and insanity
committed this act. He thought that
his lifelong affections and hopes had
been blasted. The testimony of one
witness is that he was a changed man
and thought that he would commit sui
eide. Should he then be punished for
this act, done by him under this irresis-
tible impulse? If the jury think that
lie burnt this house, they should think
that he did it in fit of of insanity, and
therefore should not be punished.
j. PARRAy CRANE FOR STATE My
brother for the Defence seemed to take
offence at my manner of addressing the
jury. l speak for myself and not for
others. 1t is argued that this case was
tried by public opinion three years ago.
Public opinion is nothing to you. You
try the case under your oaths. and the
smiles and frowrs of the public are
nothing to you in the discharge of your
duties as jurors. Strange conduct on
the part of the prisoner is argued by
the Defence. He took to drink which
- E.
tunate as Burch and became depressed.
This was no reason to burn the house
of his more fortunate rival Is disap-
pointment in love cause for such an
act: Where are the hopes Of Eurch,
blasted on account OF this crime and
buried in the ashes Of his building p
He could not marry Miss Guy after
wards on account Of the loss Of his
house. Did the accused leave the coun-
ty of his own yolition or not Was he
not aware that there was then q writ
issued for his arrest? Would anv man
Of the jury, who was charged with a
crime and innocent, leave his home in
flight and seek home elsewhere p
Miss Guy could not have been forced to
marry Burch against her will-shc could
have married the prisoner clandcstirely
at any time. II she loved him so we'll,
could she not have followed him in his
flight! 1t is contended that if the Jury
believe that the accused did TIE act.
then lac mus; be considered insane. l
say, that il he was mad. there was
method in lis madness. In regard to
the coal oil, Catlett Tut the coel oil W hich
he bought at INTERCHANGEABLE in the bot
tie bought by prisoner from Cough
Catlett did tell the truth whether he is
descendant from Patrick Henry or
not. Catlett never saw the prisoner
before. The man he saw had dark
moustache. 1t is said to-day, in argu-
mcnt, that the moustache Of prisoner
is naturally light, but there was no evil
dcnce to that fact adduced on the stand.
The prisoner does not account where
he was on the night of the 3rd of JAM
uary. Your verdict must be in accord
ance with the evidence, and l ask none
other. had heard that the plea of
insanity would be forced in this case,
and thought that it was a mistake, as
no effort was made to elicit testimony
upon this point, but to-day / am sur
prised to discover that it is the main
defence. Why did they not put medi-
cal experts on the stand to prove insan-
ity! Witnesses could only testify rs to
acts and could not give their opinions.
II is for the jury to form their opinion
from the facts. In all cases of mania
one act is not sufficient to establish it,
there must be series Of acts. The
Defence asks. where was the proof that
the prisoner rode this horse !? Auuilla
Burroughs saw him pass through his
farm on this horse, and it was the same
track. II is contended that suspicion
prompted the pursuers. why did
they not go directly to the house Of the
Prisouerf Instead they tracked the horse
over strange roads to them to the house
Of prisoner. There was no attempt To
prove that the horse was not shod in front,
and in regard to the color of the clothing
worn by the accused, Cough saw him,
who knew him, and his recollection i,
that he wore dark clothes. The De.
fence concludes by summoning up the
host of friends Of the prisoner in his
favor. but you must give your verdict
according To the evidence. without svm
Pathy. The law has no respect for per-
sons. What did the prisoner ask of
En1crs Lathrum What was the news
where he came from? Lathrum had
been in the neighborhood of the burnt
building that morning. La.hrum told
MN there was no news, when prisoner
a.