Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1881-09-29
At the close of the argument th,

At the close of the argument the
court informed Mr. Storrs that upon
the question of the jury being the
judges of the law, he should rule
against him. Thus admonished, the
eminent legal gentlemen from Chica-
60 attacked the subject with eloquent
earnestness, and contended that, SO
far as the insanity statute was con-
cerned, the defense did not claim,
insist, or pretend that it formed any
feature of their case; that there had
never been any two judges who gave
the word Insanity the same deffini-
tion or description, and that its ex-
istance or non-existance was no more
a question of law than was the exist
anee or non existance of consumption
or collie. But Mr.. Storrs did claim,
short of insanity, such a disturbance
of the nervous system, proved by
physicians who had treated him-such
an actua! arrangement of the brain as
to relieve him of all legal or moral
responsibility; and that the evidence
being in, it was for the jury to con-
slider it for all it was worth in that
connection.
He also claimed that they were to
render a general verdict of guilty or
not guilty, and that no court had any
business to disturb, interfere with
them in the rendition of that verdict;
that whatever the courts opinion
might be upon the facts, the jurors
was the judges of the law and the
facts, and any effort to quote part and
suppress part was judicial infringe
ment of the rights of the jury, which
the counsel hoped that body would
promptly resent.
At the close of Mr.. Storrs argument,
the courtroom rang with the cheers
of the excited spectators.
THE CLOSING ARGUMENT
for the prosecution was made by
Judge Cate, the eminent lawyer who
tried the case for the people with
marked ability.
Judge Newman then charged the
jury in an extraordinary fashion. He
read them y moral lecture upon their
duties to society, and declared that
they we're not the. judges of the law,
in which, under the statute, he was,
perhaps, justifable. He undertook to
demonstrate a premeditated design,
against which counsel for the defense
had argued. Judge Newman, in
Analysing the evidence, quoted all
that portion of the defendants testi-
mony tending to show, and suppressed
all of the explanatory portions of it
which tended to prove, the existance
of a premeditated design Mr.. Storrs
had claimed that there was right of
self-defense which resided in every
human being, to defend himself and
his home; that Cochran had testified
and counsel had argued to the jury
Shat the defendant had right to be-
lieve that there was imminent danger
of Hayden again persuing his wife,
for the reason that he had repeatedly
sent her messages. Mr.. Storrs insist
ed that to prevent a danger so immi-
nent was the highest case of self-de-
Tense under the Wisconsin statutes,
and it was for the jury to determine
whether there was such danger as a
matter of fact. The court ruled that
there was nothing of the sort in the
case, quoting one or two words of
Cochran's testimony, but ommitting
his direct testimony upon his ap2re-
hension of the existance Of the dan
ger.
With few vague concessions as to
the right of the jury to say something
or other about the facts, and with a
solemn admonition to them to protect
society, Judge Newman submitted the
case to the jury.
THE JURY RETIRED,
standing eleven to one for acquittal,
and so remained for twenty-four hours,
when they agreed, returning yester-
day morning, very much to the sur
prise of the court, who had been
looking for disagreement-a general
verdict of "not guilty" The ver-
dict was received with tremendous
cheers.
On yesterday afternoon the ladies
Of Neilsville rendered to the jury an
elegant banquet, at which counsel on
both sides, the jury, the defendant
himself, and the leading citizens of
Neilsville, of both sexes were present.
Short speeches were made by Mr..
Storrs, Mr.. Webb and Gen. Dodge, Of
Iowa.
The acquittal, under the circum-
stances, is without a parallel. In
the Cole-Hiscock case. the defense of
insanity was in for all it was worth,
and it was on that ground alone that
the defendant was acquitted. In the
Sickles case the defense of insanity
was in for all it was worth. In the
Mcfarland case, and in fact in all
three of those cases, by the law of
the states where they were tried, the
jury were made the judges of the law
and the facts. But in this case all
evidence tending to show insanity was
excluded, as well as all evidence tend
ing to show a diseased condition of
the brain, whether it amounted to
insanity or not; and there being no