Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1882-05-22
D. c., MONDAY, MAY p, 1882.

intended that the offence could not be completed
unless the victim died, for instance, in the dock
yard, or magazine, where the blow might nave
been committed7 It was the duty and probable
places named complete protection against the Of
fence named Where murder was committed at
all this statute applied to IT. II the fatal blow was
ute. He referred to the provision of the
constitution granting the accused, in
in the place wherein the crime was committed
The protection accorded by law was not to be
Spirited away by ingenious theories The eons
place where the accused could be subjected to
trial In the construction OF fundamental law, it
by theory. The amendment limiting the place OF
trial did not limit the powers OF the government
the legislature was instructed by the constitution
that murder was committed in the district where
the blow was struck.
THE CRIMINAL COURT HAD JURISDICTION.
The court held. therefore, that the Criminal
Court had jurisdiction in the case.
GuITBAU's ABILITY TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN RIGHT
AND WRONG.
Referring to the exceptions taken to expert and
non-expert testimony regarding the ability Of the
accused to distinguish between right a nd wrong
he said the capacity Of the accused to make such
distinction was what the law required to be known
IN determ1n1ng the question OF insanity. The
opinion after reviewing these exceptions briefly
passed them by. In reference to other exceptions
| mony given in the form of opinion was not an in
! vason OF the jury box.
MRS. DuNMIRE's TESTIMONY PROPERLY ADMITTED.
In reference to the exception of Mrs. Dummies
testimony, the court held that the exhibition of
sanity or insanity was not a communication be-
tween husband and wife at all in the sense OF the
law, which protected certain communications as
CONFIDENTIAL, any more than the color of the hair
height, or other physical characteristic. The rule
OF the law could not be applied to that which the
husband exhibited to the rest OF the world well
as to his Wife Sanity or insanity are conditions
mr. % nvhi nf
was neither matter of voluntary confidence, nor
did 1t involve the secret or confidential relations OF
the subject how the witness denial that Size had
seen any indications OF insanity could be consid-
ered as revealing any condolences. The court was
or opinion that no error had been committed in ad
mtting this evidence.
TESTIMONY AS TO IMMORAL ACTS OF THE ACCUSED.
The court, after briefly reviewing them, also
held that no error had been committed in admit
ting testimony regarding the so-called immoral
acts Of the accused. -
JUDGE COX SUSTAINED
AS to the exceptions to Judge Cox's rulings the
opinion was that the court was right In holding
as no evidence to the contrary was introduced,
that the affirmative should be held that the &C
cused had the power of choosing between right
The exception to the sentence was next con-
sldered, It being held by the defence that error
within 30 days after the end OF the next term of
the court The court hold that the act involved
udu ltltIcuCo UO UQe next Term or the Criminal
Court and not to the General Term There were
other exceptions. Judge James said, which had
been considered at length, and were found to
Judge James finished reading the opinion at
II 30 am, and remarked that there were some
questions which he had found inconvenient to
cOmDlne with the opinion he had read and which
Judge Hagner would present.
Views Presented by Judge Hagner.
Judge Hagner then referred to the Maryland
law limiting the power to try to the county where
felony was committed, which was, he held, in
strict analogy and sympathy with the Constitu-
ton OF the United States. Under the Maryland
law he held that had blow been struck In this
District when it was part OF Prince George county,
Md, and the victim died in Montgomery county,
there was doubt OF the applicability of the
United States statute, then under the Mary
there could be no doubt OF the jurisdiction OF the
court In reference to the case OF Rolla quoted by
the IN Which the a
the court had no jurisdiction, the court had Sc
cured the original papers, which did not warrant
dered by Judge Crawford. The Indictment did not
alege the facts set out by the law reporter Judge
aan aagner r said it seemed amazing If the law was
been held here. few years ago, Judge
Hagner said: a man had killed President
taken to house across the street, where he died.
1t might as we'll have been in another Jurisdiction
Everybody knows that that man committed mur-
der. He certainly did not commit it In the house
across the street. which he had never entered
Suppose those who pursued that man had killed
him. Then II the murder was not committed till
President Lincoln died, then man who was dead
would have committed crime after he was dead.
A New Trial Denied and the Judgment
Below Affirmed.
When Judge Hagner finished, Judge Cartier
said: The opinions that have been uttered are the
unanimous opinions OF the court. Therefore, a
new trial shall be denied, and the judgment OF the
court below is affirmed"
The court Immediately adjourned till tomorrow
morning.