The daily gazette., 1878-12-09

suit' lou may ii you 1e6l that you are
con strained to do SO, believe his state
ment and acquit him of mansaughter.
But you are not bound to believe that
statement though you must consider it
along with what he said against himself.
In all cases of admission the whole of
what the party said at the same time,
and related to the same subject should be
given in evidence but it does not follow
that all parts of the statement are to be
received as equally worthy of the credit;
Tor the jury is to consider how much of
the whole statement they deem worthy
OF belief, including as well the acts as
serted by the party in his own favor, as
those making against him.
But in this case the learned counsel
for the prisoner at the bar in his we'll
made and able defense OF his client, al
leges aud insists before you and this
Court that, as well before and after, as at
the time, when the act of the prisoner so
terrible and destructive of human life in
Its consequences was committed or done
he was insane, or had not suffi ciert mind
or reason to distinguish between right
ane wrong. This is the nature of his plea
for the prisoner-that he was at the time
when George Babes was slain and the
preparation for the catastrophe near
Claymont was made, person not only of
unsound mind but that such unsoundness
was of that extent or completeness that
made him as to the act committed an un-
accountable being. If this be true in
point of fact, and you are the sole judges
of that, then you should render ver-
dict of not guilty in this case. 1t would
be an ineffaceable stain upon the repu-
tation this State is entitled TO for the
tender regard her laws have for human
life, and lasting reproach to you as
jurors, If an irresponsible b'ing should
be punished for that he did not and
could not know was crime at all. In
all Jurisdictions everywhere, and among
all people, civilized or savage, a defect
of reason that renders one uuaccounta-
BILE for his acts is viewed with commls-
GRAFTON, ard the subject of it shielded
from the least reproach even. 1t is one
OF those visitations of the Creator which
all humanity respects, and which confers
immunity from punishment upon him so
unfortunate as to be the victim of tiff
l may use an expression of seeming ir-
reverence. And the law so well shields
or guards against punishment for an act
committed under its influence, that when
once insanity Is established by proof it
is presumed to continue until restoration
to reason has been established by evil
dense also. But until it is shown to ex-
ist, anol her rule of law, of equal force,
that is responsible for all his acts, un'il
the contrary is shown by him or on his
behalf. These are maxims of the law,
and by keeping them in your minds you
will be greatly aided in finding your ver-
DICT upon this indictment, which charges
the prisoner with the murder Of George
Babe. lin variety of forms of stateme ut,
though all substantially the same.
Every man, therefore, is treated In law
as sane until the contrary appears and
Harley G. Brown was sane man in the
eye of the Jaw, and you are bound by
your oaths SO to regard him unless he
has shown to you by proof that at the
time he placed that fatal cross-tie on the
trace of the Philadelphia, Wilmington
and 1Peltimore railroad, he had not suf-
ficient mind or reason to understand that
he was doing a wrongful act. That you
may the better be enabled to consider
this subject satisfactorily, we proceed to
give you to understand what insanity or
irresponsibility for crime IL. Insanity
Is inability to distinguish between right
and wrong in reference to the act itself,
and the want of power in the action to
choose whether he will do it or not.
Again it is a state of mind in which a
person is incapable of the perception or
consciousness of right and wrong as ap-
piled to the act he is about to commit
and has not the ability, through want of
that consciousness to choose by an effort
of the will whether he VIII do the deed
or not. These definitions or descriptions
of insanity were made by this court long
since and have ever been approved for
their comprehensiveness They mean
that one so destitute of reason as not to
know at the time he does an act that he
is doing wrong, is not responsible for
such act.
Now, gentlemen, that we have given
you to understand the state of weakness
or arrangement of intellect that will ex-
cuse crime, you may lay such informa-
ton alongside, as it were, of the testi-
mony of the witnesses produced by the
prisoner, and determine whether that
testimony is sufficient to protect the prs-
oner against an adverse verdict. And
while we shall not, as we have not the
right to do so, express any opinion upon
the value of that evidence as it strikes
our minds, it is our duty to warn you to
be very careful before you allow it to con-
troll your minds. The most that was prov
ed with reference to this subject anterior
to tue commission of the act, was that the
prisoner was subject TO seasons or PEE
riods of low spirits. We need not re-
mind you though it is right we should
do 1t, as fact of common experience, Of
which you have the right to take notice,
without any proof, that a great many
people, perfectly responsible criminally
As well as civllly for all their acts or con-
duct, are subject to low spirits. Nay, it
would be hard to point out any who are
entirely free from them, unless they are
of that small class sofaccountable human
beings who seem to be incapable of ever
taking any but roseate view of life. 1t
is true that some are very much more
under the influence of low state of feel
ing than others and not a fow of our
fellow creatures are at times hypochon-
driac but even that is not any evidence,
without other facts of a want of knowl-
edge of the right or wrong of an act.
There must be something more than
this; there must be superadded to mere
low spirits a natural weakness of mind
or acquired insanity, that renders per-
son incapable of determining, when he
is about to do thing, whether tits right
or wrong to do that act. He must be, in
fact, in the same stage or condition of
incapacity to distinguish between
wrongful or rghtful act, that is babe in
Its mothers arms. And as the law will
not, because it has no means to do it,
measure the capacity of men where
there is any to be measured, so it holds
every person responsibl BILE for the natural
and probable consequences of his acts
or conduct who has any capacity to dis
tinguish between their rightfullness or
wrongfulness. Without some such ca
pacity there can be no will, for there is