The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1892-10-19
DALEY GUILTY.
The Man who Killed His
Wife With a FlatirOn.
WASTHEFELL0W CRAZY?
So Many People Thought and il
was the Only Defense.
WHAT THE REBUTTAL SHOWED.
Daley was Morose aud Gloomy and
Cave Evidence Enough That He was
Not Right-But There is No Doubt
but That He Committed the Deed
He will be Safe.

At Q o'clock yesterday afternoon the
DIR. Gorton. superintendent of Butler
Hospital, was called to give testimony as
a medical expert.
The defence here rested, and In rebuttal
John Roach, Patrick Roach, Mrs.
O'Reilly. Mr.. O'Reilly aud Mrs. Mary
Murray were severally called and testified
that they had never seen anything in the
manner or appearance of the defendant
TO indicate that he was mentally unbal-
anced. The last witness confessed, in
oss-examination. that she did not like
Mr.. Daley.
Albert T. Fuller testified that he was
at the home of the defendant on the day
of the tragedy. and DALEY seemed all
right ut that time.
Dr. w. j. McCaw of the state institu
tions said he had known Timothy DALEY
about five mouths, and had seen nothing
to indicate that he was mentally unbal-
anced.
DIR. G. F. Keene of the state institutions
testified that in a conversation with the
defendant the latter said that he struck
his wife with flat iron after having some
words with her.
Mr.. Sheehan then took the stand and
testified that during the trial Monday
Mr.. O'Rielly had called him to the CORR
dor and asked to be put on the stand, as
he thought it was too bad to punish
Daley as he was clearly insane
This concluded the testimony and the
arguments of the counsel were made At
the close of these the court adjourned
until this morning.
The Jury Not Out Long.
At the opening of the court this morn
ing the jury was instructed by Judge
Rogers. He defined the crime of murder
as the unlawful killing of person with
malice aforethought, with an evil intent.
This was the question to be determined
by the Jury. The question was whether
the death resulted from an evil intent on
the part of the defendant 1t was not
necessary To discover the true motive
1t is claimed in this case that the de-
fendant did not possess that degree of re.
sponsibility which would enable him TO
form an evil intent. A law presumes n
man TO be sane until he is proved insane
If n man has not the mental capacity to
form "a criminal intent or TO render him
responsible for his actions, he cannot be
made to suffer for his actions, The ques-
tion in this case is, whether the degree of
insanity WIS great enough 70 CAUSE rea-
sonable doubt as to the responsibility of
the defendant at the time OF this act.
He charged the jury that If they should
find that the defendant committed the
homicide with malicious intent the YER
dict should be guilty OF murder. IL they
found that he committed the act while
mentally unbalanced their verdict should
be not guilty by reason of insanity.
At 1915 the jury went out TO deliberate.
In about an hour and a quarter they re
turned with n verdict of guilty. The ex-
preston of WEAKNESS upon the face of the
prisoner did not undergo any noticeable
change, but as he sat down he drew a
long breath.
Sentence was deferred on notice of ex-
ceptions.