National Republican., 1883-04-06
THE MINOR MURDER TRIAL.
More Testimony Inroduced--PrayerS Made by
the Defense and the Ruling Thereon.
Other Legal Business Transacted i'm the
Various Courts-The Record.

The trial Of Frank Minor for the murder
of his wife Victoria Minor on tho morning of
Oct II, 1882, was continued in the special
criminal court yesterday before Judge Ilagner
There was very large crowd present and
numbers of colored women were seated inside
the rail. The defense called Officers Byrnes,
Williams Barry, and Lewis, and DIR. X. A.
Bacon testified to the good character of the
prisoner
Mrs. Anna Minor was called by the defense
TO prove her sons mental condition pre-.
vious to the homicide. He was very
melancholy and would come home
from work without any cause Took
no notice of any one, and did not seem TO be
possessed of his right mind. When he was ii
years old he had been struck .on the head by
alpoliceman's billy and aitcrward was occa-'
sionally troubled with dizziness, drowsiness,
add bleeding from the nose. The first separa-
tibn between Minor aud his wife occurred
about four months before Oct. IL. Mr. Will
lam u. Ross, Minors employer, testified that
tic prisoner had acted very strangely for sew
elal weeks before the day of the homicide.
He could not calculate correctly regarding
his time, could not count his money, and
when sent with load of sand to Ninth and
Boundary streets delivered 1t to Ninth and X
streets. Minors general conduct was so
strange that witness called his foreman's
SJohn Bowman) attention to it. Did not
believe he was in his right mind.
= John Bowman and John White and John
2 Robinson fellow wOrkmen of Minor, corrob-
Grated the testimony of Mr. Ross. Officer
Melton and Joseph Sorby testified to the
excellent reputation and good habits of the
prisoner. George w. Snow testified that he
lived next door TO Minor. Had known him
for fourteen years. Minors wife left him
four years before the homicide, and was sepa-
rated from him u month During the time
she slaid away Minor would come to witness's
hnttu mud y.,fh hiu nd prN Ia
told witness that he had not seen his wife do
anything wrong, but that other people had
told him his wife was untrue. Minor never
drank was always quiet and had no bad hab-
its.
John Higgins testified that he lived two
doors from Minor and during the time his
wife was separated from him, he came to the
residence of witucss and talked about his wife
and his troubles. He rambled so that witness
on one occasion said when Minor had gone
out, There goes another crank" Minor said
his troubles were visitation upon him from
Providence for his idleness to God. After his
wife returned to him he was not as sociabe
as formerly, and seldom visited witness Be
fore, he used to come in once or twice every
day. Saw the prisoner on the morning of the
homicide and spoke to him. Minor had his
head hung down like witness had seen mad
dogs hang theirs down and did not answer
him. Ten days before the homicide, witness
had talk with the prisoner in which the lat
ter said he did not believe he was going to live
long.
SIrs. Cornela Snow and Mrs Emma Hig-
gins, wives of the preceding witnesses, cor
robCrated their testimony.
Mrs. Minor was recalled and testified that
an attack of ofdizzness and nose bleeding COM
planned of by her son had taken place two or
three days before the homicide.
DIR. Godding, superintendent of the st.
Elizabeth asylum for the insane, testified that
he had had pNnpripupn with insane nprgOnS
since 1859. Had heard most of the testimony
relating to Minors condition before the kill
ing Such blow as Minor was said to have
received might produce "a congestion of the
brain Orncmbranes and superinduce insanity.
Tonumcrous hypothetical questions, DIR. God
ding returned answers favorable to the de-
tpnSe
Rena Wimslow. n cousin of Minors wife,
was called by the prosecution and testified
that Minor passed her house at an early hour
on the morning of the killing and spoke to
her and asked how every one was.
This closed the testimony on both sides.
Mr. Miller submitted the following prayers
for the defense:
l. i'iro the whole evidence the jury shall find
thattc prisoner committed the Gct charged in
the ch-'seeut III TIE manner and at the time
and pc -. 'b - IN named, and thereby produced
the d, -'h of the said Victoria Minor as therein
shall further md when the prisoner committed
the said act he was, either by physical disease or
himself, or both operating upon his mental facul-
tics, unable to control his Will and actions IN ref
erencg to the act so committed, then in the judg-
ment Of law he was insane, and could not be
guilty Of the Olenso charged in the indictment,
and Is entitled to verdict OF not guilty.
D lfat the time of committing the act as aforc
said the prisoner was moved thereto by an In.
sane impulse controlling his Will and Judgment
too powerful for him TO resist, and said insane
impulse arose from causes physical or moral, or
from both combined, not voluntarily induced by
himself he is entitled to q verdict of not guilty
The law does rauniTe that the iDRanity
which ubsUlves from crime should exist for any
definite period but only that 1t existed at the time
when the act occurred with which the prisoner
stands charged
4, Ifthc jury have reasonable doubt as to the
case, either in reference to the homicide or the
question of insanity the prisoner should be
acquitted
not 50 insane at the time Of the commission of the
net as to render him incapable of determining be.
tween right and wrong, still If they should find
that from all the circumstances of the case, the
fact that his wife was to leave him or any other
sudden provocation, the act was committed in the
heat OF blood and without malice, the jury can
find the prisoner guilty OF mansuughter only.
d. II from the whole evidence the jury believe
that the defendant committed the act, but at the
time Of doing so was under the influence of q
diseased mind and was really unconscious that he
was committing crime, he is not in law guilty o
murder.
7. It's for the jury to say what was the state o
the prisoners MIND as to the capacity TO decide
upon the crimindlity of the particular act IN
questionable homiciue-at the time It occurred.
S. The deprivation of understanding need moi
10 be general. IL IS enough II IL existed IN refer
ence 10 the particular act.
o. The insanity need not haye existed for any
definite time. II Is enough II II existed at tht
time the act was committed.
Judge Hagner ovcrruled the prayers, but
gave the jury instructions covering them
which were satisfactory to the counsel for the
defense.
Mr.. Moore then addressed the jury in be
half of the prosecution. He reviewed the
testimony of both sides and claimed tha
Minor was actuated by malice in his deed
The court then adjourned until this morning
at 10 o'clock, when the arguments will bt
concluded and the case given to the jury.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
The following business was transacted il
the supreme court Of the United States yes
terday
Admissions to the bar-John G. Gray, o
Boston, Mass; Albert q. Mcdonald and
David G. Van Cott, of Brooklyn, N. Y.
julius b. Bissell, Of Leadvlle, Col, anC
Riley J. Bliss, of Kingman, Kansas
No. 232 George w, Campbell ct al, appel
lants, VS.. the United States Argued,
No. 233 ]. Sherman Hall, plaintiff in error
VS.. the Pennsylvania Railway company. Con
tinued.
No. 23i, John H. Rountree, plaintiff il
error, vs. L. L. Smith and NJ C. Lightner
Argued for plaintiffs in error and submitted
for defendants in error.
No. 235. Thomas Boese, receiver, &C., plain