Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1882-05-12
THE GUITEAU APPEAL.
ARGUMENT CLOSED TO-DAY.
Mr.. DAWDGE FOLLOWED BY Mr.. REED.

When the Court in General Term assembled this
morning, MI. Davidge counsel for the government,
resumed his argument in the case OF the appeal of
Charles j. Guiteau, convicted of the assassination
| OF President Garfield.
After brief review of his remarks OF yesterday,
showing that Congress had conflded to this court
Jurisdiction over Crimes including that under con-
sideration, he said that no sane man could doubt
| for single instant, under the law OF Congress,
that the crime was committed where the mortal
| blow was inflicted After going over his
mon. mon law he remarked that he had made
whether this term, murder, involved as one OF its
essential ingredients, the death of the victim in
bush," he said 'to proceed further in this investi
gatOn. 1t seems almost an insult to human under
standing to aver that that crime of crimes murder
should in any degree involve the place where the
victim died 1 can understand that the admins
| trat1on of the remedy has much to do with that
| place can have upon the responsibility or the
accused" Mr.; Davidge, after quoting Coke, Hale,
| East and Hawkins as TO what constituted murder,
concluded that the locality of death had nothing
10 do with the v1ndcation OF the authority OF the
| government. He characterized Mr.. Reeds con-
structlOn OF old English law as hypercritical. Mr..
Davidge cited as sustaining the jurisdiction Of the
court, the case OF the state of Minnesota against
GeSser, wherein the blow was struck in Min
| nesota and the victim died in Wisconsin.
| THE QUESTION OF JURISDICTION FURTHER CoNsID-
Erred.
| Mr. Davidge said that with the construction of
law argued by Mr. Reed the matter was reduced to
this: That the first Congress, with a bitter ex-
perence OF the past intending to protect the func-
uonaries and officials OF the federal government,
| knowing and well knowing the common law pro-
| tected them by saying that man might slay them
with double chance of escape-flrst the ordinary
| chance found everywhere In a land of law, and
secondly the chance that the parties stricken
| might not die in the jurisdiction where the blow
was inflicted. If the blow happened to be inflicted
In post office. or custom house, or any place
under the jurisdiction OF the United States where
| suitable accommodations were not made for the
care OF the SICK the cuprt is to go scot free This
, was the protection that the Constitution Of the
around its officials, If such principles of law were
well founded, but this was not the case. Mr..
Davidge quoted King agt Hargrave and the case of
| Grosvenor against the Inhabitants Of the land
| showing how English authorities interpreted the
meaning OF commission in criminal case. Mr..
! Davidge, referring to the common law authori-
tleS as 10 definitions, said that when they sought
| the common law to explain a term In the COnSti-
! light of the common law but to the common law
| as IL was understood by the men who passed the
law in question. 1t is the accredited rule that
When the constitution OF the United States refers
10 term 1t Is the acknowledged, accepted and
recognized g m zee. use and meaning of the word at the
time OF the passage OF the act, and the rule not
then very stringent one. Mr.. Davidge then
quoted Waring agt. Clarke, 5th Howard, p. AL, in
support OF this proposition: In further discussion
OF Ihe question or jurisdiction Mr.. Davidge, in
urging
THE INAPPLIcABT1ITY OF ENGLISH RULES,
said that in America the powers of grand jury
and petit jury always wait upon the jurisdiction
OF the court. The rule in America is essentially
different from the rule In England, where the
court conforms to the jurisdiction of the jury.
IN SUMMING UP THE QUESTION OF JURISDICTION,
he said. what mockery it would be to try this
man in New Jersey; for this great government to
wait upon the state Of New Jersey for the vindca-
tion OF its authority. This culprlt had committed
| no crime against the majesty of the state of New
III mir cold Mr. nav,
be presented to the world, that this government,
insulted by the murder of it's Chief Magistrate,
absolutely had not the power OF vindicating its
is to be committed to the state of New Jersey.
What is the state OF New Jersey before the world
we know her. sne is is ike t the e'" member member
Of family: known and respected in the
family, but OF no use or consequence out
of the law is to prevail what farce 70 be enacted
before the nations Of the earth" Mr.. Davidge said
this point or jurisdiction had not been argued be-
fore Judge Cc\, but tina judge had satisfied him
sell upon the point by methods of his own and
methods that appeared all-suf1cient He said that
ne himself, ten or twelve years ago, had occasion
| to defend man named Walker, who had killed
man on Analostan island, the victim dying in Vir-
| point he had thoroughly explored the question,
and derived from that exploration fixed opinion
| that this court had jurisdiction.
MIR: Davidge said he had endeavored to treat the
question guest ~ rom M high federal & standpoint, while
cuage cox 1 had treated Il from the standpoint OF
Judge Cox's exhaustive opinion regarding the
| question OF jurisdiction.
REFERRING TO EXCEPTIONS
| taken to the testimony of expert witnesses who
| had been asked whether they thought the prisoner
knew the difference between right and wrong Mr.
Davdge declared that that was the only legal test
In cases OF insanity. AS to the witnesses interrO-
! OF the prisoner, Mr.. Davdge said that the whole
condition Of things had been misrepresented in
aass Cox had
testimony as to this misconduct in order to show
malice malice All the evidence admitted was eyi-
insanity OF the prisoner. The defence, taking
the accused and went through his entire lie down
to the time of his trial, and taking in the trial
Itself. All he had to ask in regard to this objec-
Of the defence with the view OF determining the
range permitted in the investigation. Judge Cox
at the instance of the defendant had said he would
throw the door wide open and permit the defend
ant to gather any incidents of his life that might
me al Re de
turn hemisphere to the jury. We have right
to turn the other hemisphere to the jury" II am
just as much part Of his life as his good deeds
In the manner In which the case was tried no con-
| Judge Cox that the misconduct was admissible
AT the instance OF the defence all the life of the
man was to be explored and exhibited to the jury.
He had proved insanity from an excess of virtue.
Was there any objection to our showing his inSan-
! ity from vice" Mr. Davidge argued that In no
| sense was this evidence admitted as evidence to
the commission Of crime, for that was admitted.
MRS. DUMMIES TESTIMONY.
| Referring to the objections to Mrs. Dummies
testimony, he said Judge Cox most plainly de-
clared from the bench his rule as to the admission
or exclusion Of such testimony What was pro-
tected by law, in the relations of husband and
wife, was a communication regarding matters in
volving trust or confidence. The defence had not
cross-examned the witness as to the nature OF the
communications between the accused and the
witness 1t was simply practicing a fraud upon
the judge in the court below to let the matter 90
unexplained in order to bring it upin the appellate
| court. The defence were not in position to take
advantage OF that error, II there was error COM
| m1tted.
| He did not regard this as the most important
| case in the world. He thought too much impor-
tance had been attached to it He regarded it as
case where the law OF the land had been violated.
| It was simple violation OF the law. which ought
| to be promptly punished; the court would excuse
him from delivering anything In the way of pero-
| ration, so without further remarks he submitted
| the case.
| Mr. Davidge closed at ten minutes past IA
Mr. Reeds Closing Argument.
After recess OF fve minutes Mr. Reed began