The daily gazette., 1881-12-09

uARRIoAs,s TRIAL.
ARaUMKNTFoR THE DEFKHsR By LEVI
@. BIRD, ESQ.


ARaUMKNTFoR THE uEFEHsR By LEVI
@. BIRD, ESQ.
On the reassembling OF Court, this
morning, Mr.. Bird, Of counsel for the
defense in the trial Of Jeremiah Harri.
gan, for the murder Of Dennis Shea,
resumed his argument. He referred
to the tact that Harrigsn had ordered
Shea not to come 10 his house any
moro, and yet Shea persisted in coming.
What did he come back forf Mr..
Bird here reviewed the testimony Of
Harrisan's children, showing that Shea
visited the house surreptitiously, when
Mr.. Harrigan was away and Mrs.
Harrigan NJ home, stealing there like
q thief in the night o: snake in the
grass. He attached special imports
anoe 70 the testimony Of the children,
and maintained that 1t proved conclu.
sively that Shea had improper relations
with Harrigan's wife, and that Harri-
gan had reasonable grounds fer sus-
pecting the intimacy.
Mr.. Bird next reviewed the testi-
msny Of Kelley, Lucy and Creedon,
In regard 10 Shea sending them into
Harrigan's house for whiskey, and
classed IL as mere subterfuge on the
part Of Shea 10 get into the house
Even after Shea left Harrigan's house
he W emit around by the barn and the.
came down the road towards the
house again, when he met Harngan.
1t was then that the latter, filled with
frenzy at his wrorgsd honor and his
family shame, fred the fatal shot.
Mr.. Bird then argued strongly to
show that the infidelity Of Harrigan's
wife was the cause of his hard drink
ing, and that this continued drinking,
coupled with the attack of sunstroks
last August, had 30 impaired his
reason that he was incapable ofknow
ing what he was doing when he com.
mitted the act for which be 10 now OF
trial.
Mr.. Bird ended with an eloquent ap,
peal for the prisoner, and closed at IL 4,
o'clock.
Mr.. Lore, before addressing the jur,
for the defense, asked the curt 10 chare,
that insanity, produced by the excessive,
use OF spurious liquors which resulted II
delirium tremens, 10 q sufficient excus
for homicide committed under its in
duence. That the mind, under thes'
circumstances, 10 incapable Of kno W. nl
what 1t is doing.
In support Of this request Mr.. Lor
cited the case OF the State. vs.. Wm
Thomas, who was Indicted and tried q
New Castle for the murder Of his wifi
by cutting her throat, while iabcrin
uuder IN attack OF delirium tremens. I
this case the court held that II the iur
were convinced, from The proof that til
accused was really insane at the time q
committing the act, and knew not whs
he was doing, then the deliberate malic
necessary to constitute the crime OF mu
der was lacking and the prisoner coul
be acquitted. This issue having bee
raised IN this case, Mr.. Lore held tina,
was Incumbent upon the State TO prov
that the man was sane when the shoe
log was done. Mr.. Lore also asked Ii
Court 10 charge upon the followin
points:
| That II Is exclusively fact for u
jury TO determine from the eyidenc
before them, whether or not there
sufficient proof TO show that at the tim
u committing the act the prisoner W,
sane.
That ifthe jury have any doubt of Il
criminal capacity of the prisoner
known he was doing wrong at the tin
OF committing the crime, they are boun
70 given him the benefit OF the doubt.
Court then took recess until thr,
O'Clock.