Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1881-09-16
CAN GUITEAU BE CoNYICTEDl
Legal Effect of Removing the PresI-
dent TO Long Observation-Disclosures
of COnvicttng His Assassin of MUIR
der-Ehe Law and the Decisions.

A Washington dispatch says: The
question whether Guiteau could be tried
for murder if President Garfield should
die at Elberon, after having been re-
moved from Washington, is exciting
some discussion here. The Star of this
evening publishes the following bearing
upon the subjec':
The removal of the President to Long
Branch would seem, in the event of a
fatal termination of his injuries, to pre-
clude the possibility of convicting his as
sassin of murder. In a legal aspect the
case presented would be simply that of
a person who had received a mortal
wound in the District of Columbia, from
the effects of which his death had taken
place elsewhere, and under these circum-
stances the courts of the District
would not have jurisdiction of the
offense as a homicide, but would be
confined to q consideration of the as
sault merely. At common law, murder.
in common with other offenses, must be
inquired into in the county wherein
committed, and it was thought in Eng
land that where the mortal stroke had
been given in one county and the death
had happened in another that the ofense
was not consummate or complete in
either; that the jury of the first county
| could not take notice of the death which
took place in the second, and that the
jury in the second could not inquire of
the wounding in the first. Finally, the
statute of 2 and of Edward vi. was
passed by Parliament, which provided
that in such cases ''the trial shall be in
the county where the death happened"
In this country the question has been
passed upon by the highest courts in sew
eral of the States. In Virginia, in the
case of the Commonwealth vs. Linton,
the Court of Appeals were unanimously
of the opinion that the defendant could
not be tried and convicted of the murder
charged in the indictment, which al
legged the mortal stroke to have been Civ
en- in county in Virginia and the death
of the person striker at county In the
State of Ohio. q Virginia Cases, 205,)
In Mississippi in the case of Stoughton
VS.. the State, where 1t appeared that the
| death wound was inflicted in one county
while the death occurred in another. the
High Court of Errors and Appeals, in
quashing the indictment, used the fol
lowing language
liz bOtNOl ODlhACh W AdNO
been that, by the common law, where
the blow was given in one county and
the death happened in another, the of
fender was not liable in either. Q3 5.
W., and NJ. 255."
The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in
the case of the State VS.. Carter e Dutch,
499), held that an indictment charging a
telonious assault in New York, and that
the party injured came into and died
from its effects in New Jersey, alleged
no crime against the State The con
Guiding portion of the opinion of the
court is as follows:
''It is said that if we do not take iuris-
diction the defendant will go unpunish-
ed, inasmuch as the party injured not
dying in New York he could not be
guilty of murder there. But New York
may provide by law for such cases, and
if she does not it is their fault and not
ours"
The question was also considered in
North Carolina in Orrell's case q Deer,
1897 and Tennessee in Riley's case %
Humph, 646), and in the year 1909 the
old Circuit Court Of the District of CO.
lumbia, sitting in Alexandria-which
place was then part of the District
gave judgment for the defendant in the
case of the United States VS.. Bladen, in
which case the prisoner had been in
dicted for manslsughter, and in which
it appeared that the mortal blow was
given in Alexandria and the death hap.
pened in St Mary's county, in the State
of Maryland. The case is reported in
volume 1, at page 548, of Cranch's Cir
cult Court Reports, and although the
defendant had been found guilty as in
dicted the court held that under the
circumstances the offense was not com
plete within its jurisdiction. The pris-
oner was, however, held to answer an
indictment for assault and battery.
The common law as laid down in these
decisions is the law of this District to-
daV.