Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-12-15
KILLING NO MURDER.

The Schroeder case has ended in the &C.
quittal Of the defendant, and thus another
is added to the long list of disgraceful pre-
cedents which convince the world that in
California there is no public opinion against
murder. This case was in several respects
peculiar. There was no doubt as to the
fact that the defendant had killed De. Lee
fevre, but two pleas were advanced on his
behalf. 1t was claimed that he was justi-
fed in committing the homicide because
Lefevre had seduced Mrs. Schroeder, and it
was also asserted that he committed the
homicide while under the influence of emo
tional insanity. It is, however, very re-
markable that the defense did not substan-
tate the charge of seduction, as it must
have been in their power to do had the
charge been true. They refrained from
putting Mrs. Schroeder upon the witness
stand, and they kept her out of Court alto
gether. They relied for this part of their
case entirely upon the statements OF Dr.
SLSDDln9, WIN knSW uO Ihel- las
daughter had told him. The Court also
refused to permit the prosecution to
avail itself of this singular omis-
sion on the part of the defense,
and the result was to convey to the jury
the impression that the fact of the
seduction ought to be regarded by
them as proved, when, in truth, no satisfac-
tory evidence of it was laid before them.
We believe that the rulings of the Court
upon this point were entirely wrong and
unwarrantable, and that because of these
rulings the prosecution was practically de-
MED it's rights. We believe that no
lawyer of any reputation will express a
different opinion, yet it is perfectly clear
that upon the demonstration of Lefeyre's
criminal intimacy with the defendants
wife the whole case ultimately turned.
1t must further be pointed out that when
seduction is asserted by woman, and
there is no corroborative evidence to sup
port the charge, the greatest caution must
always be used in accepting it. For it is
fact well known to physicians and ex-
perienced jurists that women have often
made similar charges against innocent par
ties, and within the last half century at
least two famous English divorce cases
revealed precisely similar Authorizations.
A propensity to fabricate accusations OF
this kind is one of the phenomena of the
complex disease known as hysteria,
and though It may be that NO such
morbid ideas were present to the mind
of Mrs. Schroeder In the present case, it is
very certain that the jury were not per-
mitted to satisfy themselves as to the
genuineness of her story. In effect, the
Court allowed the whole theory of seduc-
ton to be taken for granted. and this not.
withstanding the fact that it was the cen.
trial point in the case. The jury were thus
thrown back upon the superstition that
Schroeder had real cause for hostility to
Lefevre, and the further supposition that
he might have been insane when he com.
mitted the murder. Of course these the
cries were incompatible. If Schroeder
killed Lefevre because he believed the lat
ter had seduced his wife, insanity had
nothing to do with his action. If he was
insane, then the seduction story need have
cut no figure in the case. But we are con-
WINGED that the evidence placed before the
jury was not sufficient to justify verdict
of acquittal, and that in rendering such a
verdict they have once more emphasized
the utter ineficiency of our criminal ma
chinery to vindicate the theory of the law
and to punish crime.