Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1878-11-18
tina, bis friends we're picking upon him and i'm

were talking about him. Is there any e'iuehoo
that they were not talking about him Are you sat
i.Ged that the evidence tends to show that they
were talking about him, aud that he kne" II
Are You satisfied of the non existence OF me TACT
that the neighbor we're talking about MN
Il you find insanity. then the next question
arising, was it OF that degree which excuses tbe
prisoner from the Of his crime Its not suf-
icient for the prisoner to show that there was IN
b at the lime some mental uen.cuoh OF IT.
regularity. But he must satisfy you tha' IL eA-
isted to such degree rs to fenuer hltn 10 law,
irresponsible for his criminal act. And this brings
me to the general rule which II Is my duty To give
you 10 this branch of the case, u rule when has
been sanctioned by the law court Us the law oil
this State.
40 excuse a man from responsibility on the
ouud of INSANITY, it must appear that ~ he time
vi dong the act he had not capacity and reason
suiici Mt to enable hm to distinguish between rlght
aud ong, rs 10 the particular act lac was dong.
That he bad not knowledge, consciousness or
c,n-cleuee enough 10 know that the act he IS do
ing is wrong act, and CRIMINAL act, and one
that he will be subject liable to punishment for
doing. la order 10 be responsible, be must nave
sufficient mind and memory to understand and
remember the relation he stands to others, anu
others to him. aud that tue act he Is doing Is con-
trsry to the PLAIN dictates OF right wrongini'y IN
furious to others, aud violation oil the dictates
uf duty. Ii there be partial arrangement or III
SANITY of mind, SO that II not IN all respects per-
fectly sane aud sound, yet If not to the extent pe-
fore indicated it " Ill not excuse criminal ACT In
other words, man may be monomanlac, MS
mind may be disordered, and, to q certain sx-
tent, il may be proved that he Is OF unsound
mind and yet, if he has mind and understanding
enough, and 10 not carried away SO but that he un-
derstands the difference between right and wrong,
rs to the act he is then doing, that Is to say, II
the man knew that what he WAS DONG was wrong,
and he was liable to be punished for 1t, and that
the act would not be excused. then he Is subject
to punishment, although theie might De some par
tial arrangement"
Now has the prisoner satisfied you by prepond-
erance Of the evidence that he was 50 insane As TO
be irresponsible fol- his act under the rule that
have just given to you You Will determine
whether you satisfied that at the time the prs
oner killed his daug bter he had sufficient mind ana
memory to distingu ish between right and wrong,
to know and deter mine that the act he WAS doing
WAS wrong, contrary to the dictates OF duty to his
child, criminal in its nature. You have heard the
evidence IN regard " his condition preceding the
homicide, and TO some extent since' are you sat
isfed that he insane to the extent that he was
unconscious of the nature OF the act he was com
hitting, that he really believed II to be right and
to be his duiyf If from mental disease ne real
ly believed that it was his duty TO Kill his enid,
that he WAS dong right IN doing So as his counsel
maintains, that he was but executing the com
mauds of God as he believed, then he is irrespen-
sible and not criminay liable. Because It would
be the mere vi the body and not OF an intelii-
gent mind. There could exist no malice, and
none of the elements would exist necessary to
constitute the crime of murder. On the other
hand, If he had suthcrnt mind, suffclent memory
to understand the nature Of the act he was doing.
to know that the partiular act he was doing was
wrong in itself, one that he had no right 10 DO,
the he had sufficient mind to determine not to do
it, and if he did not do so, but committed the act
believing It TO be wrong, knowing II " DC wrong
that 10 sufficient to render him criniDaly Haoie.
There are three pieces Of evidence which you
NAV think bear imme diately upon this issue. The
COW rsatIon testified to by DIS mother immediate
ly preceding the homicide. You heard her evid-
ence in reg ard to making his wife widow. II
true, do you not believe that the prisoner Was
in such a condition al that time 10 be capable OF
determining whether the act which he contemplat-
ed doing If he then contemplate killing his child
WAS right wrong IN and OF itseli linen the
next piece of evidence IL that OF Or. brichett
that when he found him In the held with has throat
cut that the prisoner sald he was sorry and hoped
God would forgive tin. Had he then sumo ient
mind and understanding to comprehend tue ma
ture of the act that he had done Did he then
understand, If he used that expression, that tue
act WAS wrong9 Did he then believe that The act
he had done " rs an act OF duty his part and
but an execution of the command OF Godt III 50,
and the evidence of DIR. Brickett Is true, would
you or not expect him to ask the forgiveness OF
his Maker for the act that he had done, II under
the insane delusion he believed That ne nau peeh
executing the will OF God
Another act that you may think emitted 10
some weight this question oil MS caPsc-
ty TO Diet. rhine whether he was dong right
Y,
commit suicide, so far rs the evidence discusses.
where the homicide committed. lie He'd
from the scene oil his Atrocous ACT was that
from the Consciousness that he had done wrong
here:
II is maintained that this was an unnatural
crime that there was no motive disclosed IN the
eyiden nee, and this fact Is urged upon you with
great force. And you may TANK 1t entitled 10
very great weight. H. you thnk no malice Is dis
closed YOU MA, think il entltied TO great deal OF
.kt tba a
the time was cosecsous that he was dong wrong
But Won will consider The whole evideLce and de-
termine whether or not there was any ieehhg oil
hostility towards his WIFE, and any desire at the
time to pjure her, either personally or ipJure her
feelings.
There is another fact which you have a ri ht to
consider. The prisoner has = right to 90 upon
the stand and stale any iaets or make any eKpa-
nations consistent with the facts to break the
force Of any evidence introduced against him.
And if he does not do 80, while he is not bound
to give evidence az ainst himself, and while you
are not to take the fact evidence OF his guili,
still you have y right to consider II IN connection
with the other evidence and giving to that evidence
all the force and weight to which 1t can be entitl-
ed assume that the prisoner could not ruthiuly
state anything which would dettact IN any degree
from its force against him. 1t may be SAID tnat
when the defence of insanity Is set up II Is not 10
be expected that the insane prisoner would take
the stand to testify. Ii insane at the time Of the
act, is he now insane. Ii So. 1t might be
good excuse for has not tesliiylng. II now insane
to the degree claimed be would not be IN u condi-
ton to give evidence that would be entitled 10 any
weight. If in considering the fact that he has
not stated to you the absence of knowledge Of the
act that he committed, made no explanation which
gives you any light upon the subject and you be-
l,eye that be is now in a condition to enable him
70 do go It is fact which you have right to con-
slider in connection with the other violence In the
case. 80.
Now, gentlemen, this case has been very fairly
tried by the counsel and very fairly and fully pre-,
ented to you upon the one side and the other. l
feel that have discharged my duty. And II only
remains for you to discharge yours oy declaring
the fact in this case ss you lind 1t from the EVIL
dence.
At quarter past ten, the jury retired to their
room to make pp their verdict, and Scribner was
remanded to jail He was, however, returned in
little more than an houb and q murmur ran
through the court room that the jury had agreed
This " a. indeed the fact, and at fifteen minutes
to twelve o'clock they marched into the court room
and took their seats in their accustomed places.
having been out an hour and half Scribner
was ordered to stand, which he did, and the u.s.
usl inquiry was made if the jury had agreed.
The reply was, 1--WE have"