Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1882-01-11
The Guiteau Trial.


The testimony on both sides was con-
cluded Wednesday of last week. Nearly all
the new evidence proposed by the defence
was ruled out on the ground that evidence
of insanity could not be offered in surrebut-
tai. The only new evidence Of Importance
taken by the defence was that Of j. j.
Brooks, chief Of the treasury secret service.
His statements that when he called to see
Guiteau at the Jail on the night of July I'd,
he found him asleep, and that when he called
the next day Guiteau told him he had had the
bestnight's sleep he had had for six weeks on
account of the relief he felt at having done a
duty he had long tried to avoid, are consid-
cred by the counsel for the defence among
the most important supports Of their theory
that the trial has developed.
The court was adjourned till Saturday to
give the defence time to prepare the law
points upon which it desired the ruling Of
the court. On Saturday, Mr.. Davidge,
speaking for the prosecution, asked the
court to declare that the test of respon-
sibility in respect to human intelligence is
the power to distinguish between right and
wrong, and had for its purpose simply to
find out what was the standard of re-
sponsibility in respect of human intelli-
gence. 1t did not deal with irresistible i'm
pulses it did not deal with delusions it
simply undertook to define where, in the
degradation of human intelligence, the law
drew the line Of responsibility, holding all
above that line responsible, all below ire
sponsible. The next prayer declared that
if any human being possessed of that degree
Of intelligence commits crime, he is re-
sponsible for it. In other words, that that
degree of intelligence makes him RESPONSE
BILE for the control of his own moral nature,
his beliefs, whatever they may be. The
effect of this prayer was to stamp out the
modern doctrine of moral insanity. The
law recognized no disease of a moral nature,
independent of disease of the brain. In the
third prayer the prosecution asked the court
to declare insanity to be the product of a
diseased mind, and in the fourth to lay
down the law in respect to delusion.
The prosecution argued that man of the
standard Of intelligence indicated in the
first prayer was bound to know what was
right, and the conviction of inspiration af-
forded no excuse for the commission of
crime by such person. The law draws no
line between low degree of intelligence on
the one hand and the highest on the other
in respect of responsibility for crime. This
prisoner had been held up as an imbecile
till he went upon the stand and overturned
that.defence. The charge of Judge Davis
in the Coleman murder case was read.
Guiteau showed by his interruptions clear
understanding Of the legal points in that
case. In response to one of the prisoners
pertinent Interruptions, Judge Davidge said
with electrical effect Your honor, this
man was for three weeks held up to us as
imbecile, and now listen to him he not
only knows the difference between right and
wrong, but he understands fully the law OF
the case" Guiteau took refuge from this
sharp thrust behind his old dodge of transit
tory mania. The defense in reply confined
its arguments to the consideration of two
questions First, the definitions laid down
in the revised statutes of murder and man.
slaughter, under which, if malice be not
proven, the crime would be manslaughter.
Second, the application to this case of the
question of reasonable doubt in connection
with the plea of insanity.
In the course of the argument for the de-
Tense by Mr.. Scoville there were frequent
acrimonious tilts between counsel and little
was said on the main question. The question
of jurisdiction has been raised, on which Mr..
Corkhill made a long argument. At the
conclusion of this matter of instruction to
the jury the arguments of counsel on the
evidence will commence and doubtless con-
sumo another week. Even in the event of a
verdict of guilty, the claws delays" may
operate for many weeks to keep the assassin
from the halter. Flaws respecting the legal
composition of the jury and certain acts by
that body in violation of law are limited at,
on the strength Of which new trial may be
demanded. The trial may be nearing the
end, but the approach to the termination of
the tedious proceedings may be as delusive
as the chase of the will O. the wisp.