Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-01-05
NEARING THE END.
THE GUITEAU FARCE DRAWING
TO A CLOSE.
The Law Points of the Prosecution
Presented = The AssassIn,s Conn
ments-The Case TO be Given TO the
Jury Next Week.

WASHINGTON, January 4-Att the Guiteau
trial this morning, before proceedings COM
menced, Guiteau said: "This is a good time
to make a speech, but promised the Mar
shal would keep quiet to-day, and 1 will
try to do So"
Mr.. scoville read an affidavit, setting forth
that the affiant is sole counsel for the pris-
oner. That the prisoner has been in such a
state of mind that he has been unable TO
render any assistance or suggest the
names OF any witnesses, and that
the athant has since closing the
case learned the names of certain wit
nesses who can testify to material facts for
the defense. After giving the names of the
witnesses and briefly stating what he ex-
pected to prove by each, Mr.. Scoviile moved
at he be allowed to introduce this evil
dence.
Judge Cox inquired If counsel desired to
be heard upon the motion.
Col. Co[khill said; 81 hardly think any
Colonel Reed addressed the court in
favor of the motion. He was aware that the
matter was entirely within the discretion of
the court. 1t was not, however, without
precedent, and that too in q United States
court. he then cited cases in support of
his argument, and said that in
this country 1t was the boast of
cur free institutions that the poor man
should have the same rights in a court of
justice as the owner Of palatial mansion,
aOd he felt assured that the American people
would not begrud9e one extra day that
was now asked in behalf of this prisoner in
the name OF justice and fair trial.
Mr.. Davldge replied at some length, and
denied that aUy precedent existed for re-
opening this case simply to Introduce cumu-
lative evidence, particularly In the case of
DR.. Mcfarland. He believed 1t would be
scandalous TO admit the testimony of 4
man so reckless as to form an opinion ana
be willing TO swear to 1t merely from read
ing the newspapers.
After considerable discussion by counsel,
which was interrupted by Guiteau, Judge
Cox said counsel for defense came here a
stranger to the courts of the District, and
even to the prisoner himself, and found
himself environed with difficulties from the
outset. The most serious difficulty was that
the odum attaching to the assassination
made witnesses unwilling even 10 allow .heir
names to be known to the defense Appre-
ciattng all these fficulties, which embar-
rassed the defense, he (Judge Cox had felt
disposed to offset them with an equal lati-
tude and more than ordinary facilities in
the preparation of their case. Evidence of
insanity could not be offered in surrebut-
tel. In his opinion, the proof of insanity
should be limi ed to the evidence in chief
and in rebuttiDg the evidence of the prose.
cution. He therefore must exclude the
evidence of DR.. Mcfarland. The testimony
of those witnesses by whom the defense
expected to prove that the prisoner asserted
on the day of the assassination and upon the
day after the motive for his act, the court
held, should be admitted as evidence in
rebuttal.
]. J. Brooks, Chief of the Treasury Secret
Service, was called. Witness visited the
prisoner at the jail the night after the shoot
iug. Guiteau was in bed at the time. ''He
arose in great anger and excitement" said
the witne S, land wanted to know what
meant by disturbing his rest and quiet at
that hour Of the night. / said it i'll became
a murderer TO speak in that manner; that he
had disturbed the rest and quiet of the
whole nation. He came back at me with
the. aVowal that he was no murderer but
Christian and gentleman, and that his
mind was made up; that he had Been moved
to do the act as political necessity, and
that IL was for the good of the country"
Witness continued: 81 told him l was
Republican and stalwart," and he replied,
Then you can appreciate why l did it.'
Witness detailed at some length his con.
versatiOn at that time. He (witness)
said to the prisoner: "If you had taken the
Deity into consideration you could not have
done such an act" The prisoner replied
that he had thought over the matter and
prayed over it for six weeks. and the more
he thought and the more he prayed, the
more he became convinced that the Presi-
dent must 90, and that it was his duty to
remove him.
Notwithstanding his promise In the morn
ing, Gulteau continued to interrupt, and be-
came involved In an alteration with one of
the bailiffs, who tried to silence him
"l'n slap you in the mouth" he fire.
quently snarled at him, but made no demon
strstion OF carrying his threat into execu-
tion.
At another time he said to him: "You are
nothing but miserable underling, while |
speak to fifty millions of people when
talk"
When Judge Cox had finished his re.
marks upon MIR. ScoVille's motion, Guiteau
insisted upon expressing his opinion.
"Ihavs first class decision, Judge. That's
all wantto get before the jury, what said
at hat time relative to the causes that i'm
PEELED me upon the President As for the
rest don't care a snap. would not give
fifty cents bushel for this ex pert testi-
mony. II had money enough l could get
hfty OF the best experts In the country to
swear that l am as crazy as loon. That's
just how much that kind of evidence is
worth"
Mr.. scoville introduced a letter written
by the prisoners father, in which he spoke
OF the prisoner and expressed an opinion
that be was insane.
Guiteau called out sneerinely, "Was the
object OF the reading of that letter to show
that my father was crank, or that l am
You are the biggest iackass, Scoville, ever
saw. II you can't learn any sense l shall
have to rebuke you in public.'
The prosecution then submitted state
ment OF the law points on which they would
rely, as follows:
First. The legal test of responsibility,
where insanity is set up as defense for an
alleged crime, is whether the accused at the
time OF committing the act alleged knew
the difference between right and wrong in
respect of such act. Hence, in the present
case, II the accused at the time of commit
ting the act charged knew the difference
between right and wrong in respect of such
is, If he knew what he was doing,
and that what he was doing was contrary to
the law OF the land-he is responsible.
was destroyed"
Second. II the accused knew what he
was doing, and that what he was doing was
contrary to the law of the land, it consti-
tutes no defense. even II It were true that
when he committed the act he really be-
lieved that he was thereby producing pub
lie benefit or carrying out an inspiration of
Divine origin or approval. Such a belief
would not afford any excuse, nor would
such excuse be afforded by the facts that in
the commission OF the act he was impelled
by a depraved moral sense, whether innate or
acquired, or by evil passion or Indifference
to moral obligation.
Guiteau-"All of which is false.n
Third. Insanity would, however, consti-
tute defense, If by reason of disease the |
accused at the time OF committing the act
charged did not know what he was doing. |
or, If he did know it, that what he was
doing was contrary to law.
Guiteau-"4 had no choice in the mat
ter"
Fourth. The only evidence in the present
case tending to show an irresistible imnuIse |
to commit homicide is the claim of the ac- |
cused that his free agency was DESTROYED bv |
his alleged conviction that the death of the |
President was required for the good of |
the American people, and was diyinely |
inspired. That such conviction, even If it |
really existed, could not afford anv excuse |
when the party knew what he was doing |
and that it was contrary to law. No mere |
delusion or error of judgment, not even a |
fixed belief that what is prohibited bv law |
is commanded or approved by Divine an |
thortty Guiteau-"God's Law is higher |
than mans laS."l can exempt the accused |
from responsibility for breaking the law. To |
have such an effect, the commission of the |
act charged must have been the result of |
an insane delusion, which was tne |
product Of disease, and Of such force as to |
deprive the accused Of the degree of reason |
necessary to distinguish between right and |
wrong in respect Of the act, so that at the /
time of committing the act he either did |
not know what he WAS doing or ~ he dJ5 /