Huntsville gazette., 1882-02-04
GUITEAU GUILTY!
spIdge Cox Charges the Jury-Ten Minutes
Deliberation and a Verdict OF Murder IN
the First Degree.

the First Degree.
WASHINGTON, d. O., JAM %.
The jury in the case OF the United
against Charles Julius Guiteau, Tor .,, -.
dea. of James a. Garfield, re-urned y.rd,c,
Of "guilty as indicted" At the close of NJ
l'olter's argument. Judge Cox proceeded TO
deliver his charge to the jury, He commenced
BY saying the Constitution provides that IN
all criminal prosecutions the accused shall
enjoy the right of speedy and public trial hy
an impartial jury in the State or district
where the crime shall have b cen committed.
| With what difficulty and troublA the law
has been administered i'm fhe nrrSent case
the Jurors have been daily with esses IT was
however, a consolation to think that not one
a pi y nose sacred siranteesof the Constitution
c1sed, as the last long chapter of the nroof
was ended NO one ccrld feel more keenly
dnt,as ise nnd ha te f,g gfesS sYponsbiity of his
charge them by attkefe, ice to the law as laid
down by its htShesS a'Ithorities. Before pro-
G5eeulng iuItleI ~, t, nt .sshed to notice an Incl
dent which nae tp zen place pending recent ar
gulnent. The priF oner had frequently taken oc-
cisloll 70 i.Soo aim that public opinion, as evil
eS uehseds sS "a 6 pres sandcorrespondence, ,wasin
HIS IasIt> These declarations could not be pre-
Neiteu -icept by the process of gaggfng the
pftsoF +. Any suggestion that the jury could
ue 10 -luenced bysuch lawless chattering OF
She prisoner would have seemed to him alb
50 I'd, and he should have felt that he was in
s,ulting the intelligence of the jury if he had
J. warned them not to regard it. Theindctmert
charged defendant with having murdered
| James A. Garfield and it was the duty of the
! Court to explain the nature Of tire crime
c@argcd. Murder was committed where
| person Of sound memory and discretion un-
I lawfully killed q reasohable being IN the
| peace of'tc United States with malice afore-
! thought. 1t had to be proved, first, that death
was catsed by the act of the accused, and,
| further, 1t was caused with malice and afore-
| thought. Eslat did not mean, however, that
| tAe Government had to prove any ill will or
natre5 On the part of the accused toward the
7, deceased Wherever homicide was shown to
| have been committed without lawful author
Wy and with deliberate intent 1t was sutfi-
| ciently proved to have been done with malice
| aforethought. and malice was not disproved
| by showing that the accused had no personal
| i'll viii toward the deceased, and that he
| killed him from other motives. as, for in.
stance, robbery, or through mistaking him
| for another, or Gas claimed in this case) to
| produce public benefit. If it could be shown
| that the killing occurred in the heat of pas
sion or under prey yOcation, then it would APP
I pear there was no premeditated attempt, and
i therefore no malice aforethOught, ana
| that would reduce the crime to man.
slaughter. 1t was hardly necessary, however
to say there WAS nothing OF that kind i'll the
! present case. The jury would have to say
| either the defendant was guilty OF murder or
| he was innocent. In order to constitute the
crime OF murder the assassin must have
reasonably sane mind. In technical terms he
| must be "of sound mind, memory and discre
tion." An irresponsibly insane man couldnot
| commit Inarder II he was labOring under
| disease of the mental faculties to such an
| Ire was dom z, or know it was wrons,nemory,
was wanting in that sound mhe 'de6nitioy,
| aud discretion that was part % o,.nry defeya Il
ont 80 ,l,.os,,n,ed innocent until the il5fvss
tjon a@a5nst him was established his paN
j 10 the pext place, notwlths'afUf''