The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1882-01-09

as strong as the presumption of sanity" In
further support of his position, that if there
was a reasonable doubt of the insanity of the
accused, the jury must acquit, Mr.. Reed cited
from many other cases.
Mr.. Dayidge called attention to the fact that
the prayers in behalf of the defence spoke of
the burden of proof in respect of insanity,
treating it generally. In any event his honor
would define It by speaking Of doubt in respect
of the legal standard of responsibility, and
would indicate what was meant by "reasona-
BILE Doubt
Mr.. Reed-I admit that it will be your hon
or's duty to tell the. jury what reasonable
doubt" is. The question of what constitutes
insanity, we submit, is question solely for the
jury.
The Court--The question of responsibility is
for the court; the question of fact for the jury.
Mr.. Dayidge Ito Mr.. Scoville)-You cannot
tumble this question of insanisy into the jury
box. The court will say what is legal insanity.
Mr.. Reed-Your honor will give your views
as to what constitutes insanity, but whether
this defendant was of sound mind or not is
question for the jury. Is there any argument
made against the reasoning of Judge Reese in
Illinois, Judge Bellows in New Hampshire,
and Judge Chalmers of Mississippi? Ought
not that to be the law? 1t would be monstrous
and shocking to the sense of justice OF any man
that an accused should be condemned to the
gallows about whose sanity any reasonably
fair man could Ehave any question. Send a
unatic to the galows in America? Whether
he is a lunatic or not is a question to be decid-
ed by the jury When they consider the
evidence in the seclusion of the jury room,
they may say: "Well, this man committed an
awful crime, atrocious, indescribabe, unpar-
alleled in history, yet we are not quite certain
that he knew he was doing wrong" LIS 1t not
the doctrine of humanity TO give the man the
benefit OF that doubt and hesitation, and for
the court to say to the jury: IF you have a
reasonable doubt, it is your duty to give the
benefit of it to the accused Some men will
say that that will turn the man out on the
country, and he will kill somebody else. That
is question unworthy to be suggested IN
court of justice If the mans mind had been
weary and his memory had departed from
him, should any man say that he ought to
walk as culprit to the gallows? Should any
man say that in any enlightened country to-
day? Bellinghana, tried IN England many
years ago, after he shot his victim was hur-
ried to the gallows in seven days, and an un-
doubted lunatic was convicted and condemned,
shame and disgrace to British Jurisprudence
In this case, all we ask is that your honor
shall say to the jury, describing to them, ex-
planning to them what is meant by reason
able doubt: Ii you, on your oath, have a
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"
support of the prayers asked by the defence,
but first commented on the absence OF
the Jury, which had availed itself of
the privilege given by Judge Cox this
morning and had not returned to the
court room after the recess. He said that he
did not complain of it, but it was one of the
incidents of the trial which he could not help
noticing.
Mr.. Dayidge-What is the use of indulging
in ill-natured remarks of that kind? Do you
mean to intimate that the presence OF the jury
this morning when was speaking. or their
absence this afternoon, is in any manner attri-
buted to the prosecution? Now come out IL you
mean to say So Laughter.
Mr.. Scoville-I do not mean to insinuate any,
thing,
Mr.. Davidge-Then why make snch a re-
mark?
Mr. Scoville-I do not insinuate at all.
speak out plainly what have to say.
Mr.. Davidge-It is not worthy OF man
representing position as council at the bar to
make an intimation for which there existed no
foundation whatever. [ certainly supposed
that the jury would be here when the counsel
for the defence came to state its law PROPOSE
tions.
Mr.. Scoville-I simply mentioned it as fact
that the jury did hear Mr.. Davidge's argument
and Mr.. Porter's speech this forenoon, are not
here this afternoon to hear the arguments of
counsel for the defence, and will be here to-
morrow morning to hear the closing argument
for the prosecution. However, L don't choose
to make any point about it.
Mr.. Davidge-I don think that the jury will
be here tomorrow morning, for it will be Sun
day.
Mr. Porter (referring to Mr.. Scoville's last
remark) But do not choose to let it go. Ii
the counsel means to intimate that counsel
on the part of the government had the slight
est voice in the question whether the jury
should be here this afternoon or not, it is not
true.
Judge Cox-Ido not understand Mr.. Scov lille
to mean that
Mr.. Porter-If he does not mean that, the
remark was uncalled for.
Mr. Seoville-Of course, the absence of the
jury this afternoon is just an accident, like Mr..
Davidge having cold this afternoon. Mr..
Reed my associate, and myself noticed the alb
sence of the jury this afternoon. While the jury
is bound to take the law from your honor, and
to be governed by it. submit that it is not fair
toward the defence that the jury is not here to
hear the discussion
Judge Cox-I told the jury this morning that
they might leave the court room il they chose.
But they did not choose to do SO during the
morning session.
rhe District attorney--We all agreed that
the jury might go this morning.
Mr. Scoville-It is only an accident, as stat
ed, but we have accidents always. shall not
trouble your honor with long citations OF auth
critics I am satisfied that the court has pretty
thoroughly looked into these cases, more care
fully and thoroughly than have had time to
do. Mr. Scoville then went on to argue that
j
right to pass upon the question whether the
prisoner would have committed the act If he
had been of sound mind, and he said that the
decisions according to the McNaghta case
were Just as antiouated as Mr.. Porter's style
of oratory. They had both started at the same
time.
"That is a very good point, said the prisoner,
laughing.
Mr.. Scoville went on to say that the only
way in which courts had progressed, at the pre-
sent day, was by the force Of enlightening pub
lie opinion crowding them out of the old ruts
and obliging them to abandon those precedents
which common sense, common reason, and en-
tightening public opinion say shall no longer
be asserted in courts of justice. He then re-
ferred to the opinion of Judge Wylie in the
Mary Harris case, admitting that the tendency
of modern decisions seems to have set in in the
direction of holding that one Of the elements
of crime was that the person committing 1T
shall be of sound memory and discretion; also
to a modern English case, the Queen VS.. Davis
reported in IA Cox's Criminal Cases. page 657,
in which the Judge charged the jury that,
while drunkenness was no excuse for crime,
delirium tremens, caused by drunkenness,
might be an excuse If it produced such state
of mind as relieved the man from responsible
ity. The language of the judge ia this case u.s.
''Any disease that disturbs the mind so that q
man cannot think calmly and nationally of all
the different reasons to which we refer in con-
sidering the rightness or wrongness of an act,
any disease that so disturbs the mind that it
cannot perform that duty with some moderate
degree of calmness and reason, may be fairly
said to prevent man knowing that what he
did was wrong" If your honor, continued Mr.
scoville, will charge the jury like that in this
case, we shall be very well satisfied.
Mr. Scoville had not concluded his argument
at O'Clock, when the court adjourned till
Monday morning.