The Northern Pacific farmer. [volume] (Wadena, Minn.) 1878-1885, 1882-01-12

Davidge, with the prayers in his hand, said III
low but distinct tones and measured language,
that they consisted:
! First-Of the above definition of sanity.
SECoNp-Of the declaration that il the pris-
oner possessed ability to distinguish between
right and wrong, no irresistible passion or i'm
pulse, no uncomfortable desire, no normal de-
pravity would excuse his act.
TH1RD-A declaration that the standard of in
sanity must be that of law.
FOURTH That no delusion, ability. to dis
tinguish between right and wrong being pres
ent, would excuse the prisoner.
Davidge thought the prayers of the defense,
bearing on points contained in prayers of the
prosecution, ought not to be entertained for
moment He thea read the English law
that, notwithstanding the party accused did
insane delusion, of redressing some supposed
injury or Of producing Some supposed public
benefit, he was nevertheless punishable &C
cording to the nature of the crime committed,
if he knew at the time of committing such
crime that he WAS acting contrary to law
Davidge read one American case after another
sustaining his position. One was that of q
shipper who killed a sailor and advanced peri
odical mania az defense when tried. Judge
Shepley. OF Maine, delivered the charge in this
case which WAS similar to that OF Judge Day
idge. This charge demolished the irresistible
impulse theory Mr. Davidge also read Judge
Davidge's New York charge to the jury in the
Coleman murder case. when Guiteau shouted:
Iwant to get this thing right before the jury.
Every one knows all about the Coleman case
The Jury gave a verdict against. that charge
and the prosecution knows it we'll.
The effect was electrical when Davidge, in a
most deliberate and earnest manner, said:
Your honor, this man was for three weeks
held up to us as an imbecile, and now listen to
him. He not only knows the difference between
riOhf and h17t hQ nn6Ar2tGn0S f11iIV the
law of the case.
-.'Transitory mania, that's my case
I don't pretend am insane now I've got as
gcoi q head as you or Porter either.
whole theory of defense. All I want is two
hours before that jury, and can settle this
thing all right
The scene was lively one for few minutes.
DaYidge referred to Norman case decided
by the supreme court, wherein the defense that
the inspired word OF God W2s pronounced no
defense.
Guiteau-Yes. Talk about Mormons They
are breaking the law every day, and the gov
eminent is doing nothing about it
Davidge, Qmpressively)-Yes. They are
breaking the law every day, just az the law was
broken in this case under an alleged inspira.
| ton which affords no defense to criminal
| There is no higher law known to law. A mar
must obey the law. He cannot having broker
| the law, claim exemption from punishment on
the ground that he obeyed higher law.
The argument was cOnst aLtly interrupted by
Guiteau, who showed that he was familiar with
| the decisions, and in response to one Interrupt
! ton Mr. Davidge said: We are trying lawyer
| theological lecturer, a man who although
| imbecile for three weeks, as claimed by the
| defense, was TRANSPORTED in the estima ton Of
! the jury and the crowd by his own testimony
| The line of precedent from 1913 down in these
courts and in the courts of England Is broken
| establishing the doctrine that if man knows
the difference between right and wrong he il
responsible, though he be Of little reason, &c
| centric or even partially insane.
to instruct the jury on II points, the substance
| Of which were that the law could not presume
malice in such case as Guiteau's; that it waf
question entirely for the jury; that if the de-
| PENDANT really believed that he was producing
| pubic benefit, and was actuated by an insane
Of divine origin or approval, and would moi
| have done the act but for such insane delusion
then the accused is not guilty of the
crime charged against him; thai
although Guiteau may have known that the act
was contrary to the law of the land, yet if hi
! did it under the insane delusion that it wal
commanded to be done by God, such knowl
| edge on his part would not make him liable t.
| punishment; that if he was of unsoupd MIND
he was not guilty; that insanity takes away
criminality; that if he was Of sound mind bu
without malice, the crime was only manslaugh-
| ter, etc., ETC.
The modern doctrine, the better doctrine, wal
that if the jury had reasonable doubt Of the
accused at the time Of committing the act, it wal
their duty to find him not guilty. Formerly In
sanity had to be proved by the defendant be-
| You'd any reasonable doubt.
| The COurt-In one state.
Reed-Yes. This doctrine has begun to bf
modified. In one case in Massachusetts it Was
| decided thati insanity was made out by weight
| Of evidence the accused should be acquitted
but the courts have advanced from that ground
and the doctrine now held is that if there is rea
sonable doubt of the sanity Of the accused he il
entitled to acquital.
| Reed then cited in this connection the CASE
of Hobbs Va. People 81 Illinois), in which the
judge in his charge said:
In every criminal proceeding if reasonable
doubt is entertained of the guilt of the accused
sanity is innocence Therefore reasonable
doubt Of the sanity of the accused must acquit
| The presumption Of innocence is as strong a:
the presumption of sanity
; Reed cited other cases IN further support OF
his position. He also quoted from the decision
of Chief Justice Carter of the supreme court
of the District Of Columbia in the case of the
| United States We. Albert Nicholas. It was there
held that if the jury had reasonable doubt on
the question of sanity they were bound to &C
| quit the accused
Mr.. Reed closed by saying: GAIL we ask is
that your honor shall say to the jury, describing
to them, explaining to them what is meant by a
reasonable doubt. If on your oaths you have
reasonable d. ubt OF the sanity of the accused al
the time he shot the president, it is your duty
to give him the benefit OF that doubt and say
he is not guilty.
Mr.. Scoville, for the defense followed and
criticised severely the course Of Judge Davis in
a New York case just decided, in going out OF
his way, as he (Scoville) said to render deci
sion that might be made up as if in this trial OF
Gulteau. "Yes," called out the prisoner, ''and
the jury in that case went out of their way tc
rebuke Judge Davis" Before the conclusion
Of Scoville's argument, the court adjourned
| till Monday.