New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-01-26

oner. ,4s ,be killing
malice and responsible mind in the mrrdersr in mind
the evidences was before the Jury WINE deendant IS
both those presumptions- is that the Va that
innocent till he ia proved guilty anu stiii
ti,aS H6o t i csiied reasonable doubt on any
ground. to of the essential G me heneft OF
thar doubt and TO an acGuta 1t was importane n1
PLAIN TO the jury here III the Desi way III hardly ven
could what is reasonable doubt ne coI foI he did
ture TO give an exact definition Of the term lo As 10
not know Of any successful attempt u LOowiedgc of
hch ia derived from testimony was Inv scen
have the kind of certainty that Is sf tho jury
could have a moral certainty P,tintrit7 OF wit
confidence winch the jury rad IN the 'o e,,nortuutv
nessee and in their capacity ana o Ppln facts
10 know the truth. II, lol ,te.ted I,y numerous
witnesses credible and uncontradcicd' anu dHIe or
every opportunity TO know the uHtb, e?in%Dy In
moral certainty would be inspired ny tua' nag13ary
such case donbt would be unreasonable OF ~ -nibyyr
or speculative. IL ought not 10 DC I ace Of strong
49, NJ Sis Iilt but must bc sincere uoHDt ,v
ne S VSH and wLcrs SO much more credit should
be gwen one side than the o'Aoi ''"' SAM
| be prosuced. ..,.,..r
WHERE 4 PRISONER Is ENTITLED TO TIE bLNhi"
OF DOUBT.
On the other hand tac opposing proofs might be So p
snc.d that the Jury might justly doubt on when sue
under all the circumstances. the truth IaF' anu ."
such case the accused person was ehtleu 70 'nv
benefit Of The doubt. AL that jury coHu
No yccted 70 DO was to be reasonably ana noray Ger
I'm ~ tbe ,act which they declared TO be their verdict
H. Illustration OF TINS point Judge cox quoted the enarse
OF Chief Justice Shaw, OF Massathuset's' Ia 'N' '
the Common wealth VS.. Webster - ,i..,o
Wh reference the evidence in this case very hte
oueson-tne others being hardly matters Of dispute,
inat the defendant fired AZ and shot the ieceasCd
had been testified to by the surgeons VINO were Co
tent speak, and they were bor"bG
homicide committed win nance ao o., r 1,,'aca
ae defendant were capable OF criminal IN 'eh' oi l
could hardly be gansaid 1t was not he egnr,ts
| TO prove that any tpeclm oi,usod man
hatred or malice was entertained 0y inc accuse man -,
toward the deceased President IL was suhcien' A., uo
pr"ye that the act done by deliberate neAi s az
Incl from an act done under certain luPuo' III wy
ns ~ ybiIcd to the Jury tending 10 show tIat Inc
attendant ad mlited III his own hdnd"IllIS 'u' ho %
cOncciN the ldea of removing ihe fiTs,gn' S de-
called H. SIX "ccAs piuIt '. " ~, 10 do IT,
liberated upon II, anu come 10 Gtl & ~ me-
and that abou TWO weeks before ne accolulS,'" rt
staAoued himself al certain points 10 90 tao r,,
| hut for some reason Was prevented nlS l'Tt ,,
| SHOWN An these facts came mp 10 the ,Iai
measure the proof required to eslaD,n " Ia, W., J
neiglnIuated malice afOrcthOught jury "oWu una
h'tic unt , ~ rriine charged N the indictment.
rxrcp # might be, to the one u SOUND mlAu' Hou3
ana Ion-Lut that only technical eAl SION
1'T d, r..nonsinIe eaue man lie approached that
tcnIt 1nestion lie had already saa That man VINO
Is nsanc sense That makes MIN Iiespons'O''
Inc Geience Of insanity had been so abn-ed as 20 De
brought into great discrcdlt IL was tLe t'' IC"l
tnr Dres t. pIue N verdict OF acqutta when tAeiJ
was a public sympathy Tor the Tue dc'uSCH p0' 49, 49,
especially when hcrb was pro>oc1u9h io ,, H v"I
! Lonicidr according to public sentiment, Du' Hot
according TO Jaw For tnat reason me Ielenct VI ~
sanily received win GlsiaFoI ana Pi,lV 81
| was Iosr4c tolt Nevertheless II noahl! were es'dD
nsned TO degree necessary II was perfect 3rleGe 10
Indictment Or mGIuvI an US liz, .'.. furrc
weight Ii wGuiC be observed mat IN 'Ih5 case 'lc
trouble with any question aou' " nE a,sD
called total INSANITY sucb as Ia'n5 a' - ~, h.,
nrn lupecIty N which all exercise VI reason Is WANING
and where there Is nc ieco-hItdon d" PGotal boIJfr
OF their relations. tut There was teoa'a'l' 0oi ~
inc sahy and INSANITY aaL .i ,I', Of
TINS hue person Wa 10 DO put lHeIe "tIe cIeI'
| winch a mans mental facultics, Eohel"4S' seolHCu
| ne seemed 10 be derangcl. \ man was possessed,
| perhaps by Oehei OF some'hng aV9u.u - ,,.
| 80 f.uIJ not DC rcGSuurd out Oi-"hat vas
| called az insane dclusIon; or ne mSAt .at I'D, y =
some morbid propensity seemhsP ID ai'h "hCoI
| cases when, want o. bctitr ieiM' were cameo
i.r Inns were aouptlu ana Inacunabir and III
nose cases Il was difficult 10 uci"iml "ht''eI .!'
ulleu uId passed the Inc OF moral " sai account
| uuIIIt, IUI Lis actions
PARTIAL INSANITY NoT lRREspo> s!HulTl.
The ,,rv would Dear ID mind that dld not be-
coe IRRESPONSIBLE by The mere fact OF his beng partially
usau, ouch man did not take leave vi his passions
| Nv becoming insane. He might retain az much con
troll ,eI them as ID health. lie mlsnt commit OenscS,
| 100 with which MS iuhruIty had nothing to do. He
NJ Ii ae sane TO the crime &c committed, hlSi uu-
Ind is NATURE and at Dc governed by tie same
i[r, II, relation L. other people while. on OtLer
siec.s. having %" relations Whatever 10 ihr CRIME he
un.ht b.. youm 81 deiusloh Whenever ms partial
insanity wa, reucd on defence, IL must appear iha
rt crime charged was product OF Tue dciHSiou, or
o-Ler morbid conGIuoi ana Cohntol'u WIN "' cneG
| vita CAUSE, ana mat II Was not ihe fesalt
VI sane reasoning TAcn inc person mishl De caIdpe o.
| .otwItLstaudIAa las I.Aiici ana 'HcuiA5tilOcH us
orUer i, ,o, - l,n.o, -
nueuce crime, the Gidt'! was 10 TX tHc CHARACTER
- tur d.oracI wLIcn liked responsibility 81 ireSp'n,i
bty in The outsoings oi lAr JudciA A!iu 'E lIi
upl..l lad not Naye entirely satisfactory nor III
| HARMONY the CONCLUSIONS VI medical 7cchoe
r L. insanity without regard TO the medical aspect Oh
IAe subject out II "Oud be- only properly dealt WIN 3F
| Two sciences If la" ana mcoicIhe, Inc courts hdu
therefore. adopted, aud again discarded one theory ari
flnT
| on which t. stand. aud his effort would DO II
| ave to the jury tAe iesul'r lnI1t con"-"ill!
"a me ury a. the kind Of evidence by winch courts
" Tun subtle essence called mind GccG 81 course
rur ms pccon. IL could only be known by us mani
p.t,tions The test to whetaer the conduct Of
' man and bis thoughts ana emotions cuuOInch WIN
Sfsr Of persons oi sound mind. whether they CON
Tasted hars-y. BY that a jud tmen wa formed
To a mans soundncss OF mind. And for that reason
evidence was admissible 10 Sho" conduct ana language
that would indicate 10 the general ia -Oe h'iOl CON
iIton of thc intellectual powers. ENefIWhS relating
to his mental ana pu!s history vas lH,I,'I -
! relevant, because any c"l''u9ivl Oh u" hU'J,c
mus zen large number III facts, ana letters
sInutaueuusy Wrtteu afforded one oI the best ndlcd-
tions OF mental condition LFueh't Cd IH7'i''l ID 'I'
mar, ns Sas Away pertinent; nat Juca were never a.
lowed 10 infer insanity IN the accused person nom The
mere fact OF Ito eS!S'ehc" III vac inc "H'n no"
yrr tLcrc was evidence tending shoN insane con iuc
Oh the part % tie accused person evidence ~ INSANITY
~ the ancestors was admissible corrOhoralvc Of the
"ihrr, Therefore that. III this case. tine defence
whole lie The prisoner aud reaching also ms ianly
a ite deem il to be- his dujy to call the al
| trutton Of jury 10 particular parts or II, bdI
| iIr wished tho jury distinctly to understand
Tat it WIS province, and not his {" decide upon
tIe AMI If he al any time, seemed o rcS' or
;uuuate an opinion On the iact7-Whch he AM not de
.i,- 10 dot would not he binding on them bit they
mn. draw their conclusions from the evidence.
| me- instructions winch lie had already gwen 10 the
u Imported tai tho test OF criminal responuii-
nv where The defence Ot Insanity Was uteIpo-rd Wa
whether the accused person had sufficient use OF his
reason understand the nature q" the act WIN Nmcu
he was charged and 20 understand mat II was wrong
for him to c"nu.iti it, II those were the facts ne was
rrIally re, .onsIhe Or The act whatever ItcuharCs
might be SHOWN OF hnn la other respects. On the olner
nd If hjs reason detective. al consequence Of
lrun disease that ne COlld not under stand what
duinp or could understand that what he doing
was wrong he ought u be treated irresponsible