Warren sheaf. [volume] (Warren, Marshall County, Minn.) 1880-current, 1882-01-05

lender promptly said that it was the absurd let
ter OF sane man. Over the production Of
this letter Guiteau waxed wrathfully.
He held forth for several minutes on the
mean, dirty conduct of his brother who, having
been entrusted with this personal appeal to a
political friend, had delivered it, not to Cam
eron, but to Scoville. He scornfully said that
it was not possible that these hua4ble persons
who had crawled into his case for the sake of
the notority it would give them, to appreciate
Grant, Conklng, Don Cameron and ssthose
KIND OF men, in politics and Moody in theol-
o5y. At least they might have done the bid
ding: of superior being like himself without
meddling with his private correspondence
The letter reads:
trial, and need money. I am a stalwart of
stalwaris, and so are you You think great
deal of Gen. Arthur, and so do l. My inspi-
ration made him president, and am going to
ask you to let me lave $500. If get out Of
this will return it. If not charge it to the
daily, CHARLES GU1rEAU,
Hln court, Washington, Dec. 10.
r S.-Please give your check to my brother.
J. W. Guiteau of Boston, and make It payable
to my order. [signed] G. G."
Dr. Kempster Was then interrogated respect
ing the assassin's head, with the cast of Clark
Mills in his hand. He had prepared number
of little slips of paper, representing the he~ds
of well known men and women. He exhibited
most of them, one by one, to the jury and court
giving the names of the persons whose heads
n ne had measured when compelled to do SO by
much amusement CorkhllIs head is
said to resemble Guiteau's, although
the resemblance was not striking
Ingersolps, which Davdge said bulged On the
wrong side, Chief Justice Carter's and Treasur-
or Gltillan's were most curioasly examined.
Dr. Kempster showed by these heads, all of
which were irregular, some of them much more
than Guiteau's, which he pronounced to be
good head, that very few heads were symmetri-
cal, and that symmetry was no evidence, unless
very marked, Of either insanity or idiocy. Gui-
teau kept his promise. He was noisler in the
dock than he had been out of it.
His Interruptions became, as usual,
more frequent as he became moro weary, and
toward the close OF the session he was in one
OF his own yelping moods. Fortunately Judge
Cox permitted him to write on the broad top of
the railing Of the dock, furnishing him pen and
INK for the purpose, and securing less noise
if not silence. He said some rather amusing
things, at which, of course, every body laughed.
The government expects to close it's case in
rebuttal on Saturday. The defense expects to
close its case in sur rebuttal by the following
Saturday.
JUDGE CoX'S DECISION
Following is the full text of Judge Cox's decision
remanding Guteau to the dock: It is hardly neces-
sary to say that the conduct of the prisoner during
the trial has been one of persistent violation and
defiance OF order and decorum and decency from
the beginning. The only measures which could
have been resorted to to effecually and completely
suppress this disorder were such as might have in
fringed his constitual right prisoner at trial,
and that was a conclusive argument against resort
to that. Until Saturday last no other
measure had been suggested from any
quarter, when the measure now proposed was sug-
gested in the form of motion, although it had
had
heretofore been an impression shared both by
court and counsel that the prisoners conduct and
language at the bar would probably afford the best
indications Of his mental and moral CHARACTERISTICS
and contribute largely to the enlightenment of the
court and jury upon the vital question of mental
responsibility. 1t was, therefore, in accordance
with a desire expressed to me by the
district attorney that he was allowed such latitude
OF conduct unrestralned except so far necessary
to conduct proceedings at all, in order to furnish
particularly to expert witnesses who were present,
an opportunity to diagnose his case It was thought
that no better opportunity could be afforded than
constant study Of the prisoner in the court room
Gus phases of this case daily pending the long
period which this trial has continued. As it now
appears the opinions OF the experts have been
largely founded on
EXHIBITIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE
during the trial. and if they have contributed to
enable expert witnesses to reach conclusions it is
complete vindcation of the view of the district at
torney, that this was the proper course to be pur-
sued. At this stage of the trial the object seems to
be accomplished. The trial is now approaching its
close. Some six weeks have elapsed since the he
ginning These gentlemen have had ample oppor-
tunity to make up their judgments and are now in
the course of pronouncing them before this court
ana AND country On saturdaS for the first time, as
prisoner to the dock. and the OBJ
ject of the course heretofore taken having
been accomplished, it seems to me incumbent upon
me now that the application made to impose such
restraint upon the prisoner as the circumstances
OF the case shall admit and as shall conduce to the
orderly conduct Of the case or what is left of
it. I considered this motion because doubted
the expediency of it and wished to be clear in nv
judgment that it did not conflict with the
prisoners constitutional right. He has a right
to be confronted with the witnesses
the tesmony and to gss it's imp nsar
He has right to have counsel assist him OF con-
suit with counsel lie cannot be gagged or sent
out OF court. l had considered the application and
was prepared to act upon it on the day it was
proposed, but had hoped the mere making of
the motion would have had its moral effect on the
conduct of the prisoner The proper place for a
prisoner on trial for felony is in the dock. He can
only come within the bar to plead upon arraign-
ment or receive sentence. If the court,
FOR THE PURPOSE OF FURTHERING JUSTICE.
grants him the privilege of sitting beside mis- conn
sci within the bar, it is privilege which confers
right in itself, but like any other priviledge It
may be withdrawn summarily at the discretion Of
constitutional right to act as his own counsel or be
heard by counsel, he cannot exercise both rights
simultaneously, Having asked for and had counsel
assigned him, or avaiing himself of the assistance
of counsel in any other way, he has there
by waived his constitutional right to appear
as such in person. 1t is well settled
that party cannot waive a constitutional
right expressly intended for his benefit, and sub
sequently invoke it's protection. The behavior of a
party in court, whether prisoner or counsel, is
standard by which to gauge his privilege of ex-
pressing his constitutional right. If he abuses
that right he may to extent forfeit his privi-
leges and the mere claim of such right has no
by the party himself, since the first
duty of the court is to protect
its jurisdiction against intrusion and the admins
tration of justice against any attempt to bring it
into contempt. (Section 6. Blatchford 1866 and
Otto 1881 In this court it has been an almost
matter of indulgence to allow prisoner to sit with
his counsel at the bar. That regard as simply
matter of indulgence and not right. Upon con-