Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1881-12-10
AN APROPOS CASE.
Responsibility Of Murdcrcrs.

Responsibility Of Murdcrcrs.
Washington Cor. Gin. Commercial.
| The following is the charge Of Chief Justice
Noah Davis, of the superior court of New York
city, addressed to the jury in the case of Eliza
beth Coleman, charged with the murder of
George T. Coles, in which the defence was in
sanity. 1t is such charge as Judge Cox might
well deliver to the jury in the Guiteau case. Its
applicability to this case was so apparent that
the whispered expression, she is charging on
| Guiteau." passed over the audience, and as if
such thing were possible the attention became
more marked. The chief justice said:
Insanity is usually spoken of both in common
| language and in the books as a defence to crime,
but it is no defence, because where insanity
/ recognized by law exists there can be no crime
to defend. An insane person is incapable Of
crime He is devoid, both in morals and i'm law
of the elements essential to the constitution of
crime and hence is an object Of pity and protec-
| ton and not of punishment. Therefore When
ever it is established that a party accused of
crime was at the time of its alleged commission
| insane within the established rules of criminal
law, he is entitled to acquittal on the ground of
| innocence because of incapacity to commit Of
| fence. However mOnstrous his physical act may
appear both humanity and the law revolt
against conviction and punishment of such a
person. But insanity Is condition easily as
serted, and sometimes altogether too easily ac-
cepted. Hence juries, while they should be
careful to see to it that no really insane person
is found guilty of crime, should be equally care
full that no guilty person escapes under
an ill-fOunded pretext of insanity. 1t
is important that jhries on trials of
alleged crime should clearly understand what
insanity is within the established rules of crimi-
nal law Without such rules the admnstra-
ton of justice in such cases would be dependent
upon the shifting caprices of judges, or equally
unsubstantial passions or prejudices of jurors.
In this state the test of responsibility for crimi-
nal acts where insanity is asserted, is the ca
pacity of the accused to distinguish between
right and wrong at the time and with respect
to the act which is the subject of inquiry. This
rule is stated by the authorities in different
| forms but always in the same substance In
brought down to a single question of capacity
to distinguish between right and wrong at the
! time the act was done. In the most authorize
tive of English cases it is said it must be clearly
proved that at the time OF committing the
Offense the party accused was labOring under
such defect OF reason from disease of mind as
not to know the nature and quality of the act
he was doing, or if he did know it. that he did
not know he was doing what was wrong, and
in very late case in our court of appeals the
charge in that language was held to present the
law correctly to the jury.
| So you will see that in this case the firing by
the prisoner of the shot by which the deceased
was killed being proved and admitted, the
|
on your finding. as matter of fact whether at
the time of doing the act, the prisoner knew
what she was doing, and that she was doing
| wrong; Or in other words, did she know that
she was shooting the deceased, and that such
| shooting was wrongful act? If she did know
these things her alleged insanity is not estab-
lshed within the rules of the law, however
much you may be convinced that she acted
under intensest emotional excitement or how
ever fully she believed she was justified in
/ hoxu-
you may think deceased was deserving of pun
| ishment. The doctrine that a criminal act may
be excused upon the notion of an irresistible
impulse to commit it. when the offender
has the ability to discover his legal and
moral duty in respect to it, has no place in law.
And there is no form of insanity known to law
as shield for an act otherwise criminal in
| which the faculties are so disOrdered OF de-
| ranged that man, though he perceives the
| moral quality OF his acts as wrong. is unable to
| control them, and is urged by some mysterious
pressure to the commission of the act, the con-
sequence of which he anticipates and knows"
| This is substantially the language of the court
OF appeals in the case already referred to. If it
were not so, every thief to establish his ire
spOnsibility could assert an irresistible impulse
to steal, which he has not mental or moral force
sufficient to resist. though knowing the wrong
| full nature of the act. and in every homicide it
would only De necessary to assert that anger or
hatred or revenge, OF an overwhelming desire
Is for some private or public good, had produced
| an irresistible impulse to do illegal and
wrongful act. Whatever views of scientists or
theorists on the subject of insanity may be,
and however great the variety of CLASH
ficatiOn they may adopt, the law in crimi-
nal cases brings the whole subject to
the single test /: Did the person doing the
act at that time have sufficient sense to
know what he was doing, and that it was
wrong to do it? If that he his condition it is of
n n nAypo fhath n ofc hlD
influence or imaginary inspiration in commit
ting wrong. Emotional insanity impulsive in
sanity, inspirational insanity. insanity of will
or moral sense. all vanish into thin air when
ever it appears that the accused knew the diff
ference between right and wrong at the time
and in respect OF his act No imaginary inspir
alton to do personal and private wrong
under the delusOn or belief that some
great pnblic'benefit will flow from it. when
the nature of the act done, and it's
itself wrong are known to the actor can
amount.to that insanity which in law disarms
the act of criminality. Under such notions of
legal insanity, life, property and rights. both
public and private. would be altogether insecure,
and every man who, by brOOding over his
wrongs, real or imaginary, shall work himself
up to an irresistible impulse to avenge himself
or his friend, or his party, can. with .impunity
become self-elected judge. Jury and executioner
in his own case for the redress of his own in
his party or his country. But happily that is
not law, and whenever such ideas of insanity
are applied to govern a case as the law Gas too
often they have been) crime escapes punish
ment, not through legal insanity of accused, but
through emotional insanity of courts and juries
The Painted Caves i'm Texas.
Mr.. j. Van Wie's grading forces on the Mexi-
can extension of the Sunset railway are now at
work at Painted Cave, on DEVILS river, or about
two miles beyond. The work east of that IiOint
is very rough. but Mr.. Van Vie has compare
lively easy work for about half-mile west
There are three caves at this locality, all of
which are painted, the figures being buffaloes,
bears. Indians with bows and arrows in warlke
attitudes, Indians mounted and on the chase,
squaws, etc. The caves have been tattooed en-
tirely within, and many of these figures are still
In good state Of preservation. This work was
done by the red men in years long gone by, as the
Oldest white citizens remember these paintings,
and say they look very much now as they APP
peared 80 and 40 years ago. Indicating the great
age of the paintings Mr.. Van VIE has occupied
one of these caves for kitchen and dining
room purposes It is about 40 feet long and ten
feet wide 1t is approached by climbing hill,
when ia Qnfa tho oFf