The National tribune., 1882-05-27


argued before it by Mr. Reed counsel for Gui-
teau, overruling the application for new trial,
and thus booming the assassin to death on the
scafTold.
The court room was crowded on Monday
when the decision was announced. AT Io:lo
the Judges filed into court and took their places
upon the bench. Soon after the formal open
ing of the court, Justice James said: am
instructed by the court to announce the oe-
cision in the case of the United States against
Charles J. Guiteau upon exceptions to the
Judgment of the Criminal Court" he then
proceeded to read from manuscript the decision
of the court, and after reciting the crime for
which the accused was tried, passed to the
consideration of
THE QUESTION OF JURISDICTION.
The Indictment was drawn under section
5339 of the Revised Statutes of the United
States. and although indictments under this
section had always been sustained by the courts
of this District, it was deemed best to review
the question in this connection inasmuch as
this issue had been raised in this case. The
application of this section was sustained after
full and careful examination OF its language
and evident intent and Justice James then
to the exception raised by the defence-that
the courts of this District could not take
jurisdiction because the blow was struck in one
county and death ensued in another. By the
earlier authorities there was no confusion, and
it was held that the offence could be inquired
into where the fatal blow was struck; that the
murder subsisted in the fatal blow, and cOnse-
quently was committed where the fatal blow
was struck. 1t was only when new trials were
introduced that juries were no longer allowed
to find verdictS upon their own knowledge,
and under George " juries were summoned
from the courts where the felony was committed.
The confusion which at one time existed on the
question where the trial of the felony should
take place, when the blow was given in one
county and the death occurred in another,
arose from the uncertainty whether the crime
could be considered as completed in either
county. The common law seemed to have
settled the principle that the crime was COM
mitted where the fatal blow was struck; how
ever, no such traditions or anachronisms as are
found in the common law were adopted by the
Constitution of the United States when it
adopted trial by jury. The functions of our
juries are to hear witnesses and to occupy all
the ground covered by the jurisdiction of the
court In this case
THE APPLICATION OF THE FEDERAL LAW
was a much higher consideration, and under
this law the crime of murder is definitely de-
fined and its punishment prescribed, and where
the terms of our statute law are perfectly clear
and well defined there was no intention on the
part of Congress that the courts should go back
to the common law for enlightenment. Navy
yards, forts, arsenals, dock yards, and the Dis
trict of Columbia were reserved from the juris-
diction of the States and placed under the
jurisdiction of federal law, and the ordinary
and reasonable meaning of this federal statute
(5339) meant protection from the crime Of
murder; and the simple question here is
whether this crime was, in this case, committed
within the true meaning and intent of this
statute. Upon this point the court were OF the
opinion that, if the act of the defendant
achieved murder, then the crime was clearly
cognizable under the federal statute by the
courts of this District.
NO ERRORS IN THE RULINGS OF THE COURT.
Summing up upon this question, Judge
James said: ave hold, therefore, that the
Criminal Court had jurisdiction to try, convict
and sentence the defendant, and we now come
to the inquiry whether error was committed
upon the trial" After briefly discussing the
alleged error in the questions put to expert
witnesses, Judge James said we find no error
in the admission of this testimony or in the
ruling Of the court Upon the admission Of
Mrs Dummies evidence, Judge James said the
existence of insanity is not matter of voluD-
tary or confidential relationship between hus-
band and wife, and the witness denial that
she saw any evidence of it, can in no way be
considered as disclosing any condolences be-
tween them. We therefore, find no error in
the admission of Mrs. Dummies evidence
The remaining exceptions discussed by Judge
James were TO the introduction by the prose-
cution of evidence tending to show acts of i'm
morality on the part of the defendant. This
he held was strictly rebuttal testimony, and
was clearly no error upon the point that the
court below had failed to charge the jury that
the test of insanity was whether the defendant
had the power 10 resist, as well as discriminate
between, right and wrong. Judge James said:
"We hold that the evidence did not call for any
ruling upon this point, and consequently there
could be no error on the part OF the court" The
last exception was to the day fixed for eIecu-
ton, which, in the opinion Of the court, did
not constitute error.
Judge James said although the court was
unanimous in the views set forth, there were
some questions which it was desirable to dis
cuss more fully than could well be done in the
opinion he had just read, and Justice Hagner
had consented to discuss those questions in
separate opinion.
TIE INDICTMENT GOOD UNDER THE MARYLAND
LAW.
Justice Hagner said: although Of the oT,in-
ion that nothing IS necessary to be added to the
opinion Of Justice James. still, as so much stress
had been placed by the distinguished counsel
for the defence upon the law as it existed in
Maryland when the federal statute was passed.
and upon the claim that, under the law as il
then existed, this crime cogid not have been
tried and punished here, ! have deemed il OF
consequence 10 show just what that law yraso
lie then proceeded at length 10 review the
MARYLAND law and held that under Tn. Msrv-
land act Of 1755 the Indictment would have
been good in this District. at appears passing
strange" said Judge Hagner, that the law
should appear to be at variance with common
sense Suppose that it hal happened that
boundary line should have run between the
theatre where Mr.. Lincoln was shot and the
house where he died, il would have been most