Daily Republican., 1881-10-15

N. H., that he was present at the tim
and place OF the shooting, saw the d.
fendant and heard what he said, an
that the defendants acts and words o.
that occasion showed unmistakabl,
that he was insane.
The atfiant further says that 1t is i'm
portant and necessary for the defence II
have the testimony Of experts on tn
subject of insanity and that he expect,
to prove that the defendant was insan.
at the time of the shooting by the tes
timony of the following named medica
witnesses:
Drs. Macdonald and Fitch of the In
sane Asylum on Wards Island, New
York; DIR. Bradner, late of the Pennsyl.
vania Hospital for the insane in the
city Of Philadelphia, and DR.. Sprague,
in charge ofCook county (Ill.) asylum
tor the insane.
The attiant also expects to prove by
the blowing. ia med competent medical
experts william A. Hammond of New
York, j. Marion Sims of New York,
Moses Gum and Edmund Andrews of
Chicago-that the wound was not neces-
sarily fatal, and was not ofits self the
cause of the death of James A. Garfield,
but death resulted as the result of NAL
practice of the principal physician in
charge Of the wounded man.
The affiant has reason to believe and
does believe, that there are other and
material witnesses for the defence
(whose names aud residences are as
yet unknown to him Jon the question OF
insanity; that thus far the affiant has
not been able to obtain inform stion
from the defendant or otherwise with
any parlicularity as to where he had
been Or as to the persons with whom
he has associated for some years past so
as to know whom to call as witnesses,
but the affianJ believes that upon
further inquiry within 80 days he can
ascertain the names and residence, of
many such witnesses whose testimony
would be material.
He believes that as many witnesses
will be necessary on the part of the
defense as appear on the list Of witness
es for the prosecution, to wit, A, and
the Court is respectfully asked to make
an order allowing any number of wit
nesses, not exceeding A, to be sub
pnned on the part OF the defendant as
his counsel may. from time to time
deem necessary.
The atfiant further states that the de-
fendant has no means of payment of
any expenses and that tle aftiant him
self has received nothing and expects to
receive nothing for his expenses, dis
bursements, &c.
The affidavit having been read, Mr..
Scoville said: I have endeavorad under
the instructions of the defendant TO
secure competent counsel to attend to
his defense. am myself not familiar
with criminal law or criminal practice,
and would not feel competent to take
upon myself the defense. Ihave acted
alone thus far merely from the force OF
circumstances.
As soon as application was made to
me to act for the defendant and in &C
cordance with his request, asked Mr..
Emory A Storrs, of Chicago, a gentle
man conversant with criminal law, to
undertake the defense.
Mr.. Storrs said that his engagements
were such that it would not be possible
for him to give that time and atten-
tion to it which the Importance of the
case demanded.
next applied to Mr.. Richard T. Mer-
rick of this city and received substan-
italy the same answer. Mr.. Merrick,
however, kindly consented in case the
Guesti N of jurisdiction should be rails
cd to argue that branch of the case to
the court, but he said that beyond that
his engagements would not peruit him
to take an active part in the defense
next, under the instruction. of the
defendant, applied to Mr.. Benjamin f.
Butler Of Boston, but my impression is
that the letter addressed a to him must
have been msCarrled. 1t was mail,d
by me last Monday and as yet have
received no answer. | saw what
purported to be a telegraph dispatch
from Mr.. Butler to some one in this city,
dated on Wednesday at Boston saying
that he had not heard from me. I have
not addressed him further hoping that
he has received or will receive my letter
of last Monday.