Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1882-01-07
The Cuiseau Trial.


The assassin has had little rest
over the holidays, as he announced
that lie would hold receptions in his
prision cell, and many inquisitive
visitors called on him. On Friday
of last week he read the note of some
wag informing the prisoner that Bos-
tun sympathizes with him, and that
he would yet be President. On this
text the prisoner made an opening
harangue. DIR. John z. Gray, OF
Utica, N. Y, the last ofthe witnesses
for the prosecution, delivered his
testimony.
The evidence for the defense was
concluded on Thursday.
Mr.. Davidge then read and sub
mitted to the court the following
prayers or the part Of the prosecu-
ton:
/. The legal test of responsibility
when insanity is set up rs a defense
for alleged crime, is, whether the ac-
cused at the time of committing the
act charged knew the difference be-
tween right and wrong in respect of
such an act. Hence, in the present
case, if the accused at the time of
committing the act charged knew
the difference between right and
wrong, in respect of such act that
is, if he knew what he was doing,
and that what he was doing was con-
trarv &c The law OF the land, he is re-
sponsible.
2. If the accused knew what he
was doing, that what he was doing
was contrary to the law of the land,
it constitutes no defense, even if it
were true that when he committed
the act he really believed that he
was thereby producing a public bene-
fit, or carrying out an inspiration of
Divine origin or approval. Such be-
lief would not afford any excuse
Nor would such excuse be afforded
by the fact that in the commission of
the act he was impelled by a deprav-
ed moral sense-whether innate or
acGuired-orb by evilpassions or indif-
ference to moral obligations.
3. Insansanity would, however,
constitute a defense if by reason of
disease the accused at the time of
committing the act charged did not
know what he was doing, or, if he
did know it, that what he was doing
was contrary to law.
4. The only evidence in the pres
ent case tending to show an ire
sistible impulse to commit the hOmi-
eide is the claim Of the accused that
his free agency was destroyed by his
alleged conviction that the death of
the President was required for the
good of the American people, and
was Divinely inspired. But such
conviction, if it really existed, could
not afford any excuse when the par
ty knew what he was doing, and
that it was contrary to law. No
more delusion or error of judgment.
not even the fixed belief that what is
prohibited by the law is commanded
OF approved by Divine authority al
exempt the accused from re-
sponsibility for breaking the law, at
the time he knew what he was do
ing and that it was contrary to law.
To have such effect, the committing
the act charged must have been the re-
sultof an insane delusion, which was
the product of disease, and Of such
force as to deprive the accused of the
degree of reason necessary to distid-
guish between right and wrong in
respect of the act, SO that at the time
of committing the act he either did
not know what he az doing, or, if
he did, that the act was wrong or
contrary to the law of the land.
To-day, Mr.. Davidge will make the
opening argument fortheprosecution
and on Monday Mr.. Scoy1lle will
reply for the defense. Guiteau is
again kept under strict watch, and
Judge Cox has given orders for the
management of the courtroom during
the argument to the jury. Fourteen
prayers have been prepared by the
defense to the court for instructions
to the jury.