Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-01-06

drunkenness as an Excuse lot OT1ules
Now that expert testimony in the Gull
teau trial has given the favorite defense
of criminals-emotional OF moral insanity
"a severe blow from which it is not
likely to recover, it is appropriate at this
time to consider another plea which is
frequently, and too often with success,
advanced as an excuse for the commits
sion of crime, viz, drunkenness.
This excuse is one which is contrary
to every law human and divine, and so
far from being recognized by the COM
mon law of England upon which all
law in the United States as well as in
Great Britain is founded as available,
drunkenness is expressly declared by
that law to be an aggravation Of crime.
Blackstone, in his commentaries upon
the law of England, when discussing
this subject, says: Gas to artificial, vol
unfairly contracted madness by drunk
enness or intoxication. which, depriving
men Of their reason, puts them in a tenn
porary frenzy, our law looks upon this
as an aggravation of the offense rather
than as an excuse for any criminal misbe-
havior A drunkard, says Sir Edward
Coke. who is U0Iuntdrius demon hath no
privilege thereby, but what hurt or i'll
soever he doeth, his drunkenness doth
aggravate it"
Here. then, is the common law OF
England on this subject, set forth in
plain terms, aud it is not only common
law. but common sense as well. Apart
from the fact that it is contrary to all
reason and public policy to allow any
man thus "to privilege one crime by an
other" the great danger in permitting
man to 90 free from the penalty OF his
misdeeds on the ground that he was
drunk at the time that he committed
them is most manifest How easy it
would be, should this principle
be recognized, for any man of
evil inclinatinHs, contemplating the
commission of villainOus crime, to
deliberately excite himself with drink
and then proceed TO carry out his de-
signs. But even this would not be
be necessary. All that would be required
of any one purposing crime to, success
fully and without risk, commit his con-
templated deed. would simply be for
him to feign drunkenness at the time,
and so secure immunity from all just
penalties due his acts.
Notwithstanding the manifest absurd
ity and danger attending the recognition
of the availability of drunkenness as a
proper defense of crime, it IS passing
strange how frequently juries are willing
to admit it. It's no uncommon matter, in
this country at least, to hear of verdicts
of acquittal being rendered which are
based wholly on the. ground that at the
time the criminal Offense was committed
the perpetrator thereof was irresponsible
because his brain was inflamed and
his reason rendered weak through alec
holic drinks. 1t is consoling to think,
however, that the disgust with which
the insanity dodge has filed the public
in the Guiteau case, coupled with the
damaging testimony given by experienced
and learned physicians as to the fimsi-
ness of any such plea, will not only
bring disfavor upon insanity as an ex-
cuse for evil deeds, but will also make
juries less tolerant towards crimes com
mitted through the excitement and
madness caused by the voluntary
drinking of intoxicating liquors.
And even as so-called lunatics
will be more careful to restrain their
crazy outbursts when they find that the
felOn's cell or hangman's rope will be
their certain portion otherwise, so the
man in the habit of making himself in
sane by drink will be careful either to
restrain his thirst, or if he yields to that.
to keep his passions within due bounds
when he realizes that "a jury of his
peers" will be far more inclined to visit
him with cOndign punishment for his
Offenses than to show him leniency for
being guilty of double crime.