Sacramento daily record-union., 1881-11-16
ras QUESTION OF euIrsAUs SANITY.

Court. have been regarded by some people
as evidence of deliberate purpose to
feign insanity. We do not think this is
the right explanation of his conduct. His
speech, extravagant as it is, and curiously
streaked with glimpses of perfectly sane
shrewdness, tallies remarkably with all
he has written since he has been in prison.
All his written statements, in fact, are of a
piece, and therefore it is necessary either
to believe that he has been carrying out a
deep.laid plan from the outset, or we must
conclude that what he has written is geuu-
inely indicative OF the condition OF his
mind. There is, however, nothing to Justify
the hypothesis of an elaborate and con-
sistently developed scheme on his part.
For it has been clear throughout that
Guiteau is man of less than average
mental power, and it would require a
mental power more than the average to
carry out such consistent plan. But it
does not follow from the rejection of this
theory, either that he is insane, or that, IT
he is insane, he is also Irresponsible. And
first let US consider the possibility that he
Is sane. The main point upon which the
theory of his insanity rests is his assertion
that God compelled him to kill President
Garfield. But similar notions have at va
rious times not merely swayed the actions
of individuals never suspected of madness,
but have controlled the course of nations
and races. Thus the ancient Hebrews be-
lieved that they had been commanded by
God TO destroy the populations surround
ing them, and under the influence of this
belief they carried fire and sword on all
sides. Yet it has never been suggested
that the children of Israel were not per-
fectly sane, and to this day Christendom
accepts the record of their wholesale
slaughterings as proof positive that they
were right in their belief.
In the game way the history of Chris
tianity abounds with instances of murders
and cruelties perpetrated in the sincere be-
lief that they were commanded by God.
The extirpation of heretics, from the mas
sacre of the Albigenses to the massacre of
the Huguenots, the autos da fe of Spain,
the atrocities of the Inquisition, the harry
ing of the Netherlands by Aiva, the fanat-
icism of Philip the Second, the fires of
Smithield, the myriad martyrdoms Of
Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Arabians,
the fierce irruptions of the followers
of Mohammed, the persecution of the
Scotch Covenauters. of the American
Quakers, each and all show how a belief
that God has ordained the destruction of
human life has repeatedly been made to
justify that destruction. Nor is the record
of Individual assassinations less instructive.
When Balthazar Gerard murdered the
Prince Of Orange he acted as Guiteau did,
under belief that he was the chosen in
strument of divine vengeance. Ravaillac,
the assassin of Henry the Fourth of France,
was under the same delusion. FELTON,, who
stabbed the Duke of Buckingham, was a
religious fanatic. So was the Hindoo who
murdered the Earl OF Mayo. We might
multiply illustrations of the kind, for truly
their name is Legion, but we have adduced
cases enough to make it apparent that the
assumption of Divine commission has
been one of the most fruitful sources of
carnage and cruelty in the worlds history,
and that though such an assumption may
very we'll have been delusive in all these
cases, it has never been considered as evil
dence of insanity.
1t is then quite possible to hold that
Guiteau really believes himself to have
been appointed to his work by the Deity,
and yet to regard him as thoroughly re.
sponsible. The crime he has committed is
probably not more atrocious than was the
burning of Servetus by Calvin, yet it has
never been imagined that Calvin was mad.
He indeed, being surrounded by men who
believed the same things, was not even
called to account, but on the contrary was
applauded for his cruelty. Yet had
Servetus been secular Prince, and had
Calvin asssssinated him, we may be sure
that his belief in a Divine mission would
not have saved him from the rack, the
wheel, and the gibbet. Assassination has
been always punished with the utmost
severity, and without regard to its al
legged motives. We live in an age when
mercy is supposed TO temper justice more
than at any former time, but we have not
so far cut loose from the creeds of the past
as to make it possible for Christian peo-
pie to take the position that belief in a
Divine commission is a proof of madness.
We must refuse to take that position unit
we have repudiated Christianity, in fact,
but it does not follow that We are obliged
to accept every assumption of Divine com
mandment.
We may believe Guiteau to be under a
delusion, and yet conclude him to be
completely accountable. We may indeed
90 much farther, and insist On his punish
ability, even though he could be proved
insane. For responsibility in cases OF
mental arrangement can only be demon
strated when the subject absolutely does
not understand what he is doing, and has
no comprehension of the relations and con-
sequences of his acts. Now Guiteau has
exhibited perfect understanding of all
he has done, and in his sedulous care fer
his own safety after he had shot the Presi.
dent he displayed wariness seldom
shown by the really insane. He has in
short made it clear that he has been look.
ing before and after throughout this bust.
ness, and that is the behavior of respon.
sible being. We arrive therefore at the
conclusions, Q) that his main delusion is
of character which cannot be regarded
as evidencing insanity +; ~ that even if he
could be proved insane, his conduct shows
MIN to be none the less accountable 81
that whether he be sane or insane be
possesses quite enough intelligence to be
a proper object of punishment. He may