, 1879-04-18


tnlf' statements we're ,na3c by him, a,M thcn
seek 70 intrn'!u"c evidence ut tin SPURIOUS n}rn
t'mt !. = , competent q, tc ground Of contra-
f..'s f"r1 ,.e m Mtacfs NO Foundation need hare
ness thus connected with ll suit, lc fainiIlar
prlncspfc Is Hut bcforo yoi tan co,tsa,,tc h.,,
IN! prove statements mafts outs!n different
rall lts attention To The statement u! tic tinu
| when and thu naro wltcrr. That rnie has nd
| tnrt nf application to tbc proDf OF declaration
III an !muenonislt lact made By the party him
ns', because The adm fss0ns or declarations Of
si,c party against lila uwn interest arc alrays
aamstible III evidence ngait,st him, wtlctl,cr his
s.teathf Ias be:ti irertcti 10 them or not. Ilc
."hect .,It s' G aa heen called or examined this
"ea*e.s 1t: IL has nothing Whatever to do with
u. II the Inquiry was made Of him
upon an irrelevant fact, md lie answered II,
coo,rocy .Mcy arc iound by the answer md u,nnns
tnent sciid to degrade or humfllatc him and bo
ana~crod tint. vet IN Witness eofiltl hare been
eaiea ns, o contradict hun in re,ttal. II It be
arrsb an% "noher l:e ;a;s threats against b. wife.
cay 20 witness tu di.prose him, beratsse Tic
Iaet VI thc making Of the threat Il substantial
T. tact e. which belonEs TO Tie oric.nnl ease aud h
mittcd." "''a so'''-
,hsts,, stnrra quotes largely from tho English au.
lHA1k pl4fE IlHilEt4 IL IS Il matter mt
Of choice. but nf nrxorable nccess!ty, M all thu
test!motg Tending tO show 1ntiGe ttll!et hr ct-
tai'llthcd when tho prosecution Ina The cnse, Ia
tnls Gig t!'e witness Is pnrrosrly held back.
htter Their case Is closed they propose tn u,
baeli tn the ortelna, proposition a,l tlIuw Tint
tl,is killing Na: malicious. '1'.ai oucnB liz:
whole cte nnl. u II takes a1t the sycle Of time
, We nlust f'o heard lust They have M Right 10
undertake to corkserew It In ty tho ,lrrtcnsr
that 1t Is III rchuttaf OF atntafiients n1atIc on
crnss.cxatntnatnn.''
"Air sl: vii not insist, .npposc." says t,c
I""1t, sa,1, "t!at substantive evidence ot threat
''wc 's's'st,' REPLIES Mills, "tl,at 1t is cvt.
denec to contradict not evidences of insanity,
but 70 inneach HE wlttcas''
"Ihc General proposition is too clear" says
iseasl" Wv
mo, sir" cxelaims storrs, " aul for tI.ts
reason evidence relative ami material In the
flrst Instance must be PITT tn the first H.
stagef; rn .,, S0 J, foundation in fact need to have
Certainly not" resron'is the Court.
s,n.s. nAhu !, Ivy cantot employ" continues
pslsoncra on triaf, evidence Of threat which Is
sobstai'tht!ye fuet merely bocul,se tic de-
;tn ;ense asks witness whether llo lax made
s effat, s.nhd a, 1's %itness aenes T. md ihen they
cinle ot law! Whother Stevens I' dsnfe,l t '' or
!tu, however, IS not thu material tn-
iS i, ia he Mkt "t ,btrs, m and 51qtit1! f IT. .,seq quy
sernlttE matter which t'my shonl,l have
brought out IN chief, then tie tIaestfon IL i'm
g:11orer, :1r ainl It e time tn rule nuotl IT nu,y
lhey gantot ask Stevens Til tic stand whether
hc had ever n'n.lc any threats against his wisc.n
Mills. ''>''S'
~, "l,on't u,ake any odds ubont insanity" re-
you 'lal notice u tltc defense Of i.sanlty, ani
wers bound to 60 Into it yo,rsclf''
20 YOU clattn II was our business to prove
positively tat 'lie man WIS insanus" replies hts
"Ssrer mind, Mr.. Mills" rctorts Htorrs,
"snl'iscnt unto The day IL tic owl thereof.
w! tell Sou ab1ut that w1ien rcacs, It. Hut
iii*ist that tue prctcnsc-tMt Stcve1ls niaie
threats ayainet hts wife Is competent at this
stage on teinlf OF the prosc:uttDn-fs au utterly
unwoEtllY psetetsc. II the uyIlcuce offered ID
rebuttai might have bscn used III The original
caSe at alf, they should hare put it iuto the
original ease; anl tho question vi sanity l.,s 10
ot!icr place tn 4 case of this .Earrtcr. cxccpt
that It tends to ruoye any intcrellces Of uallcc
which 'llnY spring from, tt. killing. Otror,,g It
w,sn W.T. J. raicrsnsc I" te question Of sanity Is utEar
san,ty H., We deny n%!see "'l when they deny
1--WE flavu nu doubt atout tho correctness Of
our pnsstio1s,' replies Mills, "but VIC ara nut
prepared togo Tn until VIC examine Mr.. Storrs'
aithhrlttcs.H
''un tlie precise point your Honor I.as ttull-
catcd," says Stnrrs, 1.-The consideration as to
whethcf,a tnrre fuct tint might trnt! to contra.
dtct thu defendant Haies any difference in 1e |
world, Hn1 not at thia it.siant supplied witt.
authorities autcinatcd she Question, ut,.l ex-
o!n!ned II as fully as could last night. Itisa
exl'aus.iyely it Ii argued tc shorter, thInk,
lullY." W.
"so do wc," says Mills .........