, 1881-07-10

I
sober sense upon the actual existence Of
| things; but he only; whose whole reasoning
and corresponding conduct, though governed
by the ordinary dictates OF reason, proceed
upon something which has no foundation or
| existence
According to this definition. the conditions
Of insanity are wholly wanting in the case Of
| Gnitcan.
| In the course of the same argument from
| which we have quoted, Mr.. Erskine reviewed
the case of Earl Ferrers, convicted Of mur-
der notwithstanding the plea of insanity,
contrasting it with the. one at bar-tllat OF
1latlticld. Ono johnson aided the wife of
Lord Ffrrers in securing Il divorce, and also
deprived him Of q certain contract respecting
mines Says Mr.. Er5kne: Lord Ferrers
| took up the most violent resentment against
lin. Let me here observe, gentlemen, that
this was not resentment founded upon ally
illusion; not a resentment forced upon a
distempered mind by falacious images, but
depending upon uctuttt circumstances and
rcul facts; and, acting like any other man
under the Influence Of malignant passions,
lie repeatedly declared that he would be re-
yenged OIL Dir. Johnson"
Mr.. Erskine proceeds: "Now suppose
Lord Ferrers could lave shown that no diff
ference with Alr. johnson had ever existed
regarding his wife ut all,-that Mr. Johnson
had never been his steward,-alld that he iad
only, from delusion, believed so, when lis
situation in life was quite different. Sup
pose, further, that all illusipe t1nuDiM.-
tioll had alone suggested to him that he had
1,a.at fht.,nr Jnh., hsx
for these coal-l1lines; i'll short, that the whole
basis Of his enniity was without any folnda-
ton in nature, and had been shown to have
been morbid tmuyc imperiously fastened
upon his mind"
This state of facts Mr., Erskine says would
have established Lord Ferrcrs' insanity. But
the circumstances which provoked the anger
Of Lord Ferrcrs were shown to exist not US
all illusion in his mind, but as Il fact.
"1Iis resentment proceeded to the fatal
consnnnlation with all the ordinary
indications of mischief and malice," and
"when the act wns done lie said, { am glad
have done it. IIu was william and l I'LL
revengc.l'" But ''wtlell he afterwarl saw
that the wound was probably mortal, and
that it involved consequences, he desired tie
surgeon to take all possible care OF Ills
patient"
This is almost MI exact parallel to the case
Of Guiteau. The Office t;uiteau wanteu ex-
listed; the President controlled the DISPOSE
tion OF the Office; Guiteau demanded that it
should be given 10 him; the President re-
fused his applicatidt dtl. Then Gui,eau re-
solved to be rcyenge4 OIL the man who stood
in the way Of the accomplishment Of lis
purpose; he Planned murder; lie lay in wait
for his victim; lie shot him; lie expressed his
satisfaction at the act, aud later regretted
that death had hot already resulted, anu
like Lord Fcrrers felt fear for his own safety,
desiring to be lodged in Jail to avoid the
apprehent!ed vengeance of the populnce.
The case Of Arnold lwho shot ut Lord
OnsIow is also similar 10 that Ut Guiteau.
Arnold frequently declared that "Lord
OnsIow would ruin his country just as
Guiteau said Garfield would ruin the kepub-
lican party. Mr.. Erskine pronounced ar
no1d's crime to be a case ut human resent
mcnt." Soof the case of one oliver who shot
one " oo,l because the latter lhad refused him
his daughter in marriage. When next he
met the nan he rcgardedl rs an enemy.
DlUOtil1I4 UACI A.Ao lHJAI5 4lC AAh SN4S4C'@s
he shot him upon the spot" Says Mr.. En-
skine of him: lie was ln9n acting upon
c:cist;n0 fuc1s, and upon huma ~ rcscntnltnts
connected with tllem." = '"Neither ttli |
he 20 to N1r. Woods under the influence Of
but he went to destroy the life of
man who was placed exactly in the circunl-
stances which the mind Of the criminal
represented him."
Judged by these standards, Guiteau is a
malignant devil. entitled to suffer
the seyerest penalties of the Jaw: