The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1882-01-09


lS43 down. In these courts and in the couFt
. OF England was lnbroken, establishing tn
doctrine that II u man know the ditierenC
between right and wrong he Is responsible
though he be OF little reIson,' eccentric o
even partial insane.
Dayidge referred to the Mormon CasedC
cided by the Supreme Court, wherein tn
detesne that the Mormons prlCtiCed pOlyg
amy in obedience to the inspired word q
God, was pronounced no defense.
"Tes," said Gniteau, talk about th
Mormons; they are breaking the Inv ever,
day, and the Government Is doing nothing
fabout Il"
"Yes" said Dayidge impressively "They
arc breaking the law every day, just us the
law WIS broken in this case--under alleged
inspiration, which affords no deiCuse tc
the criminal. Therei is no higher law known
tolaw. Aman must obey the law. He eau.
not, having broken the law, claim exemp
ton from punishment on the ground that
he obeyed u higher law"
with these remarks, said Davidge, ~
submit the prayersof the prosecution, mere.
ly adding that these propositions Of law
ought TO be read together, and when you SO
collect 1t think your Honor will come to
The conclusion that they completely cover
the fcgal requirements OF the case"
The Prisoner-"NIormonism is nm insti.
tuition for the benefit Of private lust Nv
act was patriotic nct for the benefit Of the
American people. They are well satisfied
with my act"
Col. Reed opened an argument for the
defense in the advocacy OF the prnyers pre-
sented by them. He promised his re.
marks by the concession that in the use Of
a deadly weapon in such manner as to
result in death, the law presumed malice,
TINT it need not be discussed. The qucs.
ton whether or not the killing OF the Pres
ident was done with malice, WIS question
entirely and exclusively for the Jury. The
defense claimed the act was done without
malice on the part OF the defendant. II
the jury had reasonable doubt OF the guilt
ot the accused, 1t was their duty to acquit
him. They had no discretion us to insan-
itY. The modern doctrine-the better doc
trine-was, that if the jury had reasonable
doubt OF the sanity OF the accused ut the
time OF committing the act, it was theiE
duty to lind him not guilty. Formerly. the
sanity had to be proved By the defendant
beyond any reasonable doubt.
The Court-ln one State.
Reed-Yes; theat doctrine began to be
modified in the Rogers case, in Massachu-
sets, when it was decided that il insanity
was made out by the weiget Of evidence
the accused should be acquitted, but the
courts have advanced from that ground,
and the doctrine now held is that II there
is reasonable doubt OF the sanity OF the nc.
cnsed he is entitled to acquittal.
Reed then cited in this connection the
case OF Hops va the People, 3lst Hi.
nois, in which the Judge in his charge
said: IN every criminal proceeding, if
reasonable doubt is entertained Of the
guilt OF the accused, the jury is bound to
acquit Sanity is guilt, insanity is inno-
cence; therefore reasonable doubt Of the
sanity OF the accused must 'acquit, and
presumption of innocence is as strong rs
Il presumption OF insanity.
Reed cited other cases in further support
oI his position. He also quoted from the
decision Of Chief Justice Carter Of the
Supreme Court against Albert Nicholas.
1t was there held that II the jury had rca.
sonable doubt sn the question Of insanity
they were bound to GcQuit the accused.
II admit" said Reed, lit will be Your
Hoaors ddty to tel the jury what reason-
able doubt is. The question of what con-
stitutes insanity that we submit is the
question solely for the jury
The Court-The question Of RESPONSE
bllity is for the Court. the question OF fact
ior the jury.
Dayidge Ito Scoville)-'You cannot tum-
bic this question OF insanity into the Jury
box. The Court will say what is legal in
sanity"
Reed Your Honor will give your views
as to what constitutes insanity, but wheth-
er this defendant was Of sound mind or not
IS question for the jury. Is there any ar
gument madcagainst thereasoning of Judge
Reese in Illinois, Judge Bellows in New
Hampshire, and Judge Chalmers OF Missis.
slppi? Ought not that to be law? 1t
would be monstrous and shocking to the
sense Of Justice ii any man that is accused
should be condemned TO the gallows about
whose sanity any reasonable fair man
could have any question, TO send lunatic
to the gaIlows in America. Whether lie is
q iunatic Or not is a question to be decided
by the jury. When they consider the cvi,
denceinthe seclusiOn OF the Jury room they
may say, We'll, this man committed an
awful crime, atrocious, indescribable, un-
pAralleled in history, yet we are not quite
certain that he knew hc was doing wrong. :
Is it not the doctrine OF humanity 10 give a
man the benefit OF that doubt and hesita.
ton, and for the Court to say to the Jury,
II you haye any reasonable doubt itisyour
duty to give the benefit Of it to the nc.
cused?
Some men will say, "that will turn the
man out on the country and he will kill
somebody else" That is question TN.
worthy to be suggested in Court OF Jus.
tice. II the mans mind had been weary
and his memory had departed from him,
Should any man say that he ought 10 walk
as culprit to the gallows? Should any
man say that in any enlightened country
to-day? Bellingham, tried in England
many years ago, after he had shot his vic.
tim was hurried to the gallows in seven
days, and an undoubted lunatic was con.
victed sand condemned, disgnace TO
British jurisprudence. In this case, all we
ask Is that your honor shall say to the jury,
describing to them and explaining to them,
what isJneaRt by a reasonable doubt, III
you, on your oath, have reasonable doubt
Of the sanity Of the accused at the time he
shot the President, it is your duty to give
him the benefit of that doubt, and say he
is not guilty"
Before the conclusion OF the argument OF
Reed Court adjourned until Monday,
This afternoon the Guiteau Jury ayailed
themselves Of permission Of the court, and
under charge OF two baililis went out for a
drive. ~ =
A number Of checks were received in
the prisoners mail this morning, which
were deposited at Riggs banking house for
collection. 1t is not known whether tbey
Ore genuine or were sent merely MS hoax
The opinion is freely expressed BY mem.
bers Of the legal profession that the dis.
cassfon Of the legal points involved in this
case, particularly those raised by the de.
Tense, may be prolonged for several days
before the arguments to the jury can BE-
reached.