National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1882-01-26

show a. chronic condition Of insanity before
the crime and, on tic other side,
TO show an exceptionally quick inelli-
gence and decided powers OF determination.
The jury would have TO draw It's own conclusions.
Wa the prisoners ordinary, permanent chronic
condition Of mind such that he was unable TO
tngnish between right and wrong in his conduct2
Was he subject, oil the time, TO insane
delusions which destroyed his power
so TO distinguish; and did those continue
down to aud embrace the act for which he is on
trial? If So, he was simply an irresponsible
Intelligence q sune people, so that he could dis
ungulsh between right aud wrong as TO his &C.
tons2 If another person had committed the
cIalcd The wlcEedne @s Of IT, Would he
have understood the character of the
act and Us wrongInlnes' If another
The Jury must consider these questions In It's own
mind. the jury were satisfied that his ordinary
SO far that he knew the character Of his own &C.
tons aud how far they were right or wrong-nnd
that he was not under any permanent insane de-
fusion which destroyed his power of discrimi.
mating
BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG,
then the remaining inquiry was whether there
was any special insanity connected with this
defense was the existence of nm insane deluson
III the prisoners mind, which so perverted his
TS%sSH the bcw hm S from
The question for the jury to determine WIS:
what was the condition OF the prisoners mind ut
the time when this project was cNccutcd2 If he
were sufficiently sane then to be responsible
" mlttered not what might have been his cOndi-
ton before or after. Still evidence had been prop
cry admitted ms to his previous and subsequent
condition, because 1t threw light, prOspectiyely
and retrospcctYely, on his condition nj tho time.
lnnsmuch us these disorders were of gradual
growth and Of indefinite continuance, If he
were insane shortly before or shortly after
natural TO infer that he was so at the time; but
stili all the evidence must centre around the time
when the deed was done.
And now, gentlemen to sum all | have said to
you. IT, you find nom the whole evidence that, at
the time of the commission Of the homicide, the
prisoner was laborlnt under such defect of his
reason that he was incapable of under
standing what he was doing or OF sec.
ing that 1t was n wrong thing to do
MS, for example, If he were under the insane de-
fusion that the Almighty had commanded him to
diton Of mind, but was an object of
conf RSsion, aud should be now acquitted.
IT, on the other hand, you find that hc
was under no Insane delusion, but had the posses
his act was wrong; aud II, Of his own free will,
he deliberately conceived the idea and executed
the homicide, then whether his motives
were personal vindicIivencss political ami
political wrongs, or morbid desire for not0iicty,
or If you are unable to discover any motive Mt all,
the net is simply murder, and II is your duty to
find verdict Of guilty MS indicted Or amer IL
suggestion from Mr. Scoville TO that ehecD If you
find that the prisoner is not guilty by reason ofin.
sanity II is your duty to say so. You will now re-
tire to your room and consider your verdict"
During the delivery of the Judges charge,
which was completed Mt $40 y. m, there was per-
feet stiffness In the crowded court room and even
the prisoner kept absolutely quiet with the excep.
lon OF one or TWO simple interruptions. The jury
Immediately retired, and many of the spectators
left the room