Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1882-01-28

From Judge COx's Charge In the
Guiteau Case.

EEOAu ouOSc NOA OnAISc III tle
Guiteau Case.
The question for the jury to determine was
what was the condition of the prisoners mind
At the time when this project was executed.
If he were sufficiently sane then to be respon-
sible, it mattered not what might have been
his condition before or after: still. evidence
had been properly admitted as TO his previous
and subsequent condition, because it threw
light prospectively and retrospectively on his
condition at the time. Inasmuch as these
disorders were of gradual growth and of in.
definite continuance, if he were insane short
ly before or shortly after the commission OF
the crime, il was natural to infer that he was
so at the time. But still. all the evidence
must centre around the time when the deed
was done. The jury had heard a good deal
of evidence respecting the peculiarities of the
prisoner through long period of time before
this occurrence, and il was claimed on the
part of the defence that he was, during all that
time. subject to delusions that were calcu,atsd
to disturb his reason and to throw it off its
balance. The only materiality of that evi.
dence was the probability which it might af-
ford of the defendants liabilities to such dis
orders of mind, in the confederation which il
might yield TO other evidence tending to show
such disorder at the time of the commission
Of the crime. The jury must determine
whether. at the time the homicide was COM
mitted, the defendant was laboring under anv
insane delusion prompting him and impel-
ling him to do the deed. Naturally they
would look first to any explanation of the act
that might have been made by the defendant
himself at the time, or Immediately before or
after. Several papers had been laid before
them that had been in the prisoners posses
sion and that purported to assign the motive
for the deed. In the address to the American
people, of the sixteenth of June, he said -
conceived the idea of removing the President
four weeks ago Not a soul knew Of my purpose.
conceived the idea myself, and kept il to myself
read the newspapers carefully for and against the
administration, and gradually the conviction dawued
upon me that the Presidents removal political
necessity, because he proved traitor 10 the men
who made him, and thereby mpericd the life of the
nation.
Again he said in this address -
lngrsttude is the basest OF crimes. The President
under the manipulation of the Secretary Of State
has been guilty of the basest ingratitude to the
stalwarts His expressed purpose has been to crush
General Grant and Senator Conkling. and thereby
open the way for his denomination in 1884. In the
Presidents madness he has wrecked the once grand
republican party. and for that he dies.
And again -
This is not murder; ii is political necessity. 1t
will make my friend Arthur President, and save the
republic.
The other papers were of similar tenor.
There was evidence, that, when arrested, the
prisoner refused to talk, but said that the
papers would explain all. On the night of
assassination, the prisoner had said to the
witness Brooks that he had thought over it and
prayed over it for weeks that he was satisfied
that he had to do the thing, and had done it as
matter of duty. He had made up his mind
that the President and Secretary Blaine were
conspiring against the liberties of the people,
and that the President must die. In addition
to this, the jury had the important testimony
of Mr.. Reynolds as to the prisoners state
ments oral and written, about q fortnight
after the shooting. There he was found
reiterating the statements contained in his
other papers, and saying that the situation at
Albany suggested the removal of the
President, and that, as the faction fight be-
came more bitter, he became more decided,
that he knew that Arthur would become
President, etc.
The prisoner here remarked that REYNOLDS
statement was incomplete.
Judge Cox proceeded to quote from the
address to the American people, which was
written and given to Mr.. Reynolds.
now wish TO state distinctly why attempted to
remove the President. I had read the papers for
and against the administration very carefully for
two months tefore conceived the idea OF removing
him Gradually. az the result Of reading the
papers, the idea settled on that II the President
were removed it would unite the two factions of the
republican party. and thereby the government
from going into the hands of exrebcls and their
nortl ern allies. II my own conception, and
whether right or wrong. take the entire re.
sponsibilify.
A second paper, dated July 10, addressed
to the public, reiterated these statements,
and added: 81 have got the inspiration
worked out of me-"
The jury had now before it everything
emanating from the prisoner about the time
of the shooting. There was nothing further
from him until three months afterwa ards, and
now he would pass to consider the import of
all this. The jury would consider, first,
whether this evidence fairly represented the
feelings and ideas that governed the prisoner
at the time of the shooting. If it did. it rep
resented thing which he (Judge Cox) had
not seen characterized in any judicial utter
ance as an insane delusion. They would
consider whether it was evidence of insanity,
or whether, on the contrary, it showed an
ample power Of reasoning and reflection on
the arguments and evidence for and against
resulting in the opinion that the President
had betrayed his party and that if he were
out of the way it would be benefit to his
party and would save the country from the
predominance of their political opponents
SO far there was nothing insane in the con-
clusion. It had doubtless been shared by
good many heated partisans who were sane
people; but the difference was that the pris-
oner reached the conclusion that TO put the
President out of the way by assassination was
political necessity. When men reasoned
the law required them to reason correctly
So far as their practical duties were con-
cerned, when they had the capacity to dis
tinguish between right and wrong. they were
bound'to do it. Opinions properly so called,
(that is. beliefs resulting from reasoning, re.
Election and the examination of evidence), +,
afforded no protection against the penal con-
sequences of crime. man might believe a
course Of action to be right, and the law
might forbid it as wrong; nevertheless, he
must obey the laws. and nothing could save
him from the consequences Of the violation
of the law except the fact that he was so
crazed by disease as to be unable to compre-
hend the necessity Of obedience. In this con-
nection Judge Cox quoted the decision Of the
Supreme Court in the Mormon ease. In like
manner. he said, man might reason himself
into conviction Of the expediency and
necessity Of protecting the character of DO
litical association, but 10 allow him to find
shelter from punishment behind the belief
would be simply preposterous. Between one
and two centuries ago there had arisen a
school Of m0ralists who were accused Of