Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-12-22

difference between delirium tremens and mania
Potu-one being caused by absence from
drink and the excessive use.
IL would he impossible 10 tell Just where
sanity lief; off and insanity began but when de-
iuslons and Authorizations were evident IL was
clear that the subject was in the realm Of mania
potu. DIR. kempster referred to numerous
points IN the hypothetical question that led
him to the opinion that the man in the qucs-
uon was suffering from mania potu. In
regard TO the scattering Of money. he under
stood that a man who desired TO be considered
generous and openhanded might throw il
around recklessly when in his cups but hardly
u the extent indicated in the question. Up 10
a certain point there is a sort of conscious
ness that induces man 70 care for him
sell. The fact that notwithstanding this
lavish use OF money only IS bill had
been lost would not lead DR.. Kempster
to change his opinion and induce him 10 think
that this intelligence and regard for protection
Of self-int rest was present. The money, so
lar as the man knew, would be lost and might
nave been had IL not been for the good feeling
and friendship of his friends.
AcEITAIN CONTINUITY OF INTELLEcruAL ACTIVITY.
Any man on the verge of financial ruin might
on the day that a business deal from which
much had been hoped fell through. exhibit the
same excitement and wildness of behavior as
did Ward under those circumstances as de-
scrlbed by Judge lioge.
The fact that Ward went to the saloon on the
night OF June is to keep an appointment would
show certain continuity of intellectual activ-
lty. but IT would not affect witness opinion.
Tor men suffering from mania potu are not
deprived Of their reasoning faculty and are
able to recollect appointments and Keep them,
especially when 1t Is 81 appointment to be kept
III bar room.
In regard to the cargo Of ice on which Ward
Is SAID to have loaned money, the fact that he
Iad inquired OF a lawyer as to the value of the
biil OF Iadlng as security and had taken his
money back when he found that il was not good
security, DIR kempstar said. would lead him
to think that the man had a pretty clear in
sight into what he doing.
THE ACT Oh SHOOTING.
The act, as stated by Judge Hoge, Of Ward
drawing pistol and shooting at the floor and
then when the man was escaping shooting again
would hardly seem an act of discrimination.
but rather the result If Authorizations
A man VII. had been soaking for weeks
would be as mach affected into decisions by I
moderate amouLt of liquor by a large one.
The act of drinking however little would start
into activity the whole line Of decisions that had
hitherto lain dormant IN the man. A person
IN this condition when arrested and deprived
OF liquor would not necessarily develop de-
hrlum tremons.
DEGREE OF RESPONSIBILITY.
Judge Hoge asked: what is the degree of
moral responsibility an a man in the condition
outlined in the Hypothetical question and re-
stricted to my limitations using fire arms and
shooting at a retreatiug MANI Does il not evil
dence NOR than the wildness of behavior in a
man under decisions and call for some motiy, =
The act might be the result of "A delusion.
Men acting under delusion frequently act
with marked and apparent intelligence. Still
the single act, as you have mentioned. taken
apart from all the testimony OF the preceding
acts that are necessarily in my mind, would
seem to demand some real motive.
. One has no right to form "A conclusion. how
ever, as to "a single act without taking into con-
sideration all that has gone before and any
such opinion would be worthless"
I'm the case of a man with real or imagined
grudge against some else where would the
moral responsibility for his using firearms
against that man begin and endy
circumstances at the time and preceding
would bear upon the point. The man might
he suffering from mania potu, which, in my
opinion. would relieve him from the legal re-
sponsibility for his acts.
DIR. HAMILTON CALLED.
After DIR. kempster left the stand Surgeon
General Hamilton Was examined
He testified that Adler's spinal cord did not
appear to be injured.
The defense said they would not pursue the
third line of deiense-that Adler surgical
treatment was improper.