Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1884-12-22

judge whether his statements are subject to
exaggeration, and see what reliance YOU can
give to his testimony. You heard the tsssi-
mony of Drs. Ssaborn and Hsrlsw. The tes-
tincny in the case coaes almost exclusively
from the prisoners relatives and INN ediass
family.
Are you prepared to say here that the pri-
soner didn't commit the erirae when the evil
dence shows that be did? This man not re-
sponsible for this crimei Has be ever denied
the commission of this offence or that he
went to Tuek's to crafty his lust BY an indie
cent and violent assault on q Young wifes
Aud yet jury of Intelligent citizens Of the
county of Kennebec are asked 10 say that the
prisoner at the bar did precisely what he did
not do
The Attorney General read extracts from
the testimony Of witnesses, to show that if
the prisoner had epilepsy, he was responsible
for his acts during the intervals of lucidness.
Didn't the prisoner on the morning of the
murder have mental capacity enough left on
seeing that the wagon was gone to know
that Mr.. Tuck was away from home and
julia alone, and thar then wasxhe opportuni-
~ for him to commit a foul outrage? On
seeing Mrs Tuck in her own honse he knew
his purpose and intent and at once took steps
TO commit the act. Il is ridiculous to sup
pose thar because the prisoner placed his
hand beneath this womsn's clothing he dill
not intend to commit rape. hold that there
is not an atom of evidence TO show that his
errsnd 10 Tuck's was 10 commit adultery.
Is there any attempt on the part of the
counsel 70 disprove the confession! He con-
cedes il is true. Haven't the witnesses given
the substance of Bakers statement? 1t ia
presumed he told nothing but the truth 1t
" Ia al
again and again that he would surely be pun
ished. The wounds on the body OF the wo-
man Indicated thai he told Libby the truth.
The Attorney General here read the con-
fession of Baker, commenting upon it ss he
passed along, and asked at the close if there
was anything in it to support the theory of
the defence that the prisoner intended to COM
NIT adultery.
You can judge for yourselves what his pur-
pose was, and leave this question for you TO
consider and matter for you to determine
Gentlemen, what more do you ask? This
prisoner 10 convicted from his own mouth,
by his own voluntary statements. | am sat
ls6sd that this 10 as plain picture of murder
as ever was exhibited in 4 court of justice.
He had the purpose and design and accom-
plishsd just what he intended to. He was pre-
pared to use all the violence necessary.
| ask you if ever prisoner in 4 court
showed more intelligence. Why, he has
even been consulting with his counsel in this
court, and yet the defence want you to rem
because he says he is laboring under de-
fusion. There is nothing but pretense and
insinustion to show that the prisoner 10 not
responsible. He may not exhibit so much
sharpness and sagscity as other citizens in
the community. But ask you, gentlemen,
If men with lower order of intellect, with
no respect for law, your life or mine, are to
be allowed to roam at large in this community
and commit assaults on pesceable citizens ?
Look at the testimony. He was always
obedient, there were no quarrels at
prison, he was good boy at
home. Although subject to these fits. he
was able to enter into the ordinary vocations
of life as any other young man. These Ats
stopped last April. Something else must be
established. 1t wouldn't do to leave the
prisoner there. So this wild appearance was
brought in here. Was there any wildness in
his eye the day he went forth TO murder, or
for some time previous? You are asked to
take this wildness of the eye and find he is
not responsible human being. l suppose
you will hesitate before you come to
any such conclusion. Gentlemen, / leave
this case with you. When this trial 10
closed, and justice has had its cay, when
verdict 10 rendered in accordance with the
law and the evidence. every man will feel
safer in his home. and you will retire from
here with tie conscious feeling that you have
discharged your duty to the State and the
prisoner, and may your decision he such that
when you pass from these busy scenes you
may have the assurance that you stood for
law. order, Justice and good government
The Attorney General closed his argument
at .. 10, speaking nearly two hours. Judge
Whitehouse then delivered his instructions to
the jury. Although not lengthy, it was a
very able and comprehensive charge, and was
so plain as to be perfectly Ineligible to the
jury. Following is brief abstract:
Judges Charge.
Gentlemen of the jury
Again the solemn responsibility has been
imposed upon jury of this county of deter
mining the momentous issue involving the
life of u human being. The defendant is
charged with killing and numbering one Julia
F. Tuck, wilfully, felonously, and of his
malice aforethsught. 1t is not controverted
that she came to her death by violence ap-
piled by the hand of this respondent. 1t is
claimed on the part of the government that
the circumstances are such that your verdict
snOuLu De murQer III Lne ureL ueRree. Inc
counsel for the other side claims that if the
prisoner 10 accountable at all he is only guilty
of murder in the second degree.
Upon the very threshold of this inyestiga-
ton the evidence raises the inquiry whether
the prisoner has sufficient intellectual sound
ness to render him responsible to the law.
This is question for the jury, To excuse q
man from responsibility for his acts it must
appear that he has not sufficient mental ca
paclty and reason to distinguish between
right and wrong with reference to the partc
ular act under consideration that he has not
sufficient knowledge and conscience to know
that the act is a wrong and q criminal act,
for doing which he is liable to be punished !;
that he has not sufficient mind and memory
to understand and remember his relations to
others and the relations of others to him,
with special reference to the act under con-
sideration; to understand that the act which
he is performing or is about to perform is
in plain violation of right, the dictates of
duty and conscience You will carefully dis
tinguish between mere intellectual feeble
ness, mental debility and this degree of un-
soundness to which have called your atten-
ton. There may be mental feebleness, there
may be even an unnatural abnormal devel-
opment Of some faculty or passion amount
ing to monamania, and yet if the person has
this degree of mental capacity aud reason
which | have described he is responsible for
his acts done in violation of criminal law
1t upon all the evidence you find that the