National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1882-05-13
THE GUITEAu CASE.
Conclusion OF the Arguments on the Bill
of ExccptIOns.


Mr.. Davidge, for the Government yesterday re-
sumed his argument in the Court in Banc in the
appeal case of CharlesJ. Guiteau, convicted Of the
murder of President Garfield. Continuing his
argument on the question of Jurisdiction, Mr..
Davidge said that no sane man could doubt for
single instant under the law of Congress- that the
crime was committed where the mortal blow was
inflicted al almost blush" he said ito proceed
further in this investigation. 1t seems almost an
insult to human understanding to aver that that
crime of crimes, murder, should in any deglee in
vole the place where the victim died. can under
stand that the administration of the remedy has
much to do with that place, but / cannot UNDER
stand what bearing the place can have upon the
responsibility of the accused" He cited authori-
ties to show what was meant at common law of
the commission of an oIense. In the case of
Grosvener against the Inhabitants of the Land he
found an explanation of the English view of what
law was applicable to 1t. In this case 1t was held
that
THE PLACE WHERE THE SHOT WAS FIRED
was where the act was committed and the Court
refused to set aside the verdict on the ground that
the case had been properly tried. Why was 1t that
q great Government like this should wait upon the
Where and when had this culprit done aught
against that State? What an example to set up to
me great ,Uregn powers d aS inls Nation mas
the assassin Is it not exhibition to the Nations
shame and disgrace? What u farce is being en-
acted before the nations of the EARTH that although
this crime committed here, still we must travel
down to Sandy Hook in the State of New Jersey
and there let this trial take place. II was too
clear, 1t appeared to him, for argument that this
Indictment was right and proper before this court
The matter of jurisdiction had never been argued
before Justice Cox, and the point was not raised
until at the close of the trial Passing to the qucs.
ton of insanity, which was the main defense, Mr.
Davldge, afr reviewing the testimony, main
tanned that he was unable to see how It showed
that tho man was not of sound mind Judge
Cox had said he would throw the door wide open
and permit the defense any evidence in support of
their theory. This having been done, the Govern
ment had the right TO show
THE OTHER AND VICIOUS SIDE.
mans misdeeds were as much part of his life
as his good actions. Mr. Davidge took the same
ground in relation to the admission of Mrs. Dun
mires testimony as the District Attorney did. He
claimed that the confidential relations had not
been inquired into, and she only gave such owl
dence as might have been given by any person
not holding q marital relation. He did not re-
gard this MS the most important case in the
been attached to It, He regarded II as case
| where the law of the land had been violated 1t
was simple violation of the law, which ought
| to be promptly punished; the court would excuse
him from delivering anything in the way of pero-
ration, so without further remarks he submitted
the case. After u five minutes recess Mr.. Reed
| commenced his closing argument He replied to
the arguments of the other side, and said after
listening to them he was more fully convinced OF
the position he had taken than ever. He touched
on the ndmissibility OF Mrs. Dummies evidence,
portance should be paid to echnicalities. The
court then adjourned till Monday 1t is the general
opinion that the decision will not be rendered for
q few DAYS,