The daily gazette., 1878-12-09

a falling limb in 1875 but none of the
witnesses who proved these clrcum-
stances prove that his mind or power to
distinguish between right and wrong was
affected, more than for very few weeks
at most. and during that time 1t is not
averred by thewitnesses that there was an
unusual appearance of mental affection.
This, as L recollect, seems to be the sub
stance of the testimony as to the prison.
er's mind before the act was committed.
The first evid nee you have having any
tendency to show want of responsibility
points 10 period subsequent to tho
tragedy, and Is mainly that Of persons
who served upon the Coroner's jury
They have expressed their opinions
with respect to the state of the prisoners
mind as shown, they consider, by his
on Its travels to ascertain the facts about
the killing of the four men who met their
untimelv death upon that fatal train and
passed without the least warning into
that dread hereafter, for which the best
among us are in need of some prepara-
ton. Those opinions if we give all of
them at least as much, if not more force
than they all expressed, amount to
opinions only of men, certainly not any
better qualified than yourselves to draw
conclusions from facts. T hey are not
experts, that is, persons of sci entitic skill;
or of experience SO far as you or we
know, ln passing upon the mental states
of men. They have therefore no special
qualifications to enlighten your minds
upon a subject that has ofientimes baf-
fled the scrutiny of the specialist or per-
son who has made study OF specially
of the subject of insanity. But they do
give you facts, and it is for you alone to
judge whether, in your consciences, you
believe them to be such as should acquit
this prisoner. it seems from the testi-
mony of these jurymen that when the
Coroner took the prisoner to the scene
of the wreck he gave to them the same
account of his performances on chat fatal
night of the 18th of June last, that he
had given before in the witnesses for the
prosecution but the latter we may sup
pose discerned nothing in his conduct or
manner which challenged their attention
more than perhaps the natural concern
which one not fiend or idiot would
evince when viewing the scene of his
most dire transaction. The witnesses for
the defence describe his agitation, hag-
gardness, apparent absence of mind in
biting his hat and finger nails, and wild
look out of the eyes. This is that upon
which they base their opinion that he
was not in his right mind, or capable of
distinguishing right from wrong. Could
self-possessed and sedate when confront
ed with the accessories of such disaster
and standing upon the very spot where it
occurred We leave the answer to that
to you, who alone are to deal with the
facts of this case. We forbear to go one
step further in presenting this testimo mony
lest we may in some. way, not legitimate
for us, influence your minds with respect
to the weight you ought to allow it to
have in making up your verdict.
Finally, If you should not be satisfied
in your minds beyond a reasonable
doubt-that is unless you should be clear
ly of the opinion upon the evidence be-
fore you that the prisoner meant in fact
10 produce, or, in legal presumption con.
templated the consequences of his unlaw-
fui act, you should acquit him of either
degree of murder and convict him of
manslaughter only. In such case your
and form as he stands indicted, but guilty
Of manslaughter. On the otner hand,
you should find him guilty of murder
Of the first OF murder of the second de-
gree, as you may consider the testimony
will warrant you in dong. And if after
considering the whole case you shall not
be satisfied in your minds, from the tes-
timony of the witnesses, that the prison
er at the bar, at the time of the wrecking
Vi buo bidiu anu buc DdDt
was capable of knowing thet he was do
ing q wrong act you should find not
guilty ofany crime.
The charge of the Chief Justice closed
at 4.30 and the jury retired. AS soon as
they had reached their chamber they be-
gan at once to weigh the testimony and
compare conclusions. The first ballot
was taken soon after entering, and it
was discovered that there were three for
Ill
degree, and the rest for verdict of man.
slaughter. On the second ballot those in
favor of manslaughter recorded an ad-
dition of one which made the jury stand
nine to three-nine for manslaughter
aud three for acquittal. Upon subse-
quent ballots, the side for acquittal was
won over gradually, until finally, upon
the eighth ballot the whole twelve were
accorded in union. The followi will
show how the jury stood:
Ballots. I'd deg Man Acqsittal.
slaughter.