St. Paul daily globe., 1893-12-30


paranolac of the most pestilential type.
But he did not come. told you that L
did not think that Prendergast was,
under the law, the victim of deluSion.
NOW say that | don't think that he is
even an enthusiastic believer, that he
ever was an honest or loyal believer in
the books, sanctitied III their origin,
from which he so literally quoted'
The incident of Prendergast's denun-
citation of Witness Doherty, and the use
OF language which he would not nave
used had he been loyal to his faith. was
cited. The prisoner, supposed by his
attorney to possess great sanctty, pro-
fessed religion to assist in the infla-
tion of
HIS OWN VANITY.
boy after boy, according TO the tes-
timOny of many witnesses, was assailed
and interfered with by Prendergast
when getting his papers at the news
paper Offices" continued MIR. Trude.
''H1 took advantage of his strength and
their weakness. Experts who saw the
defendant but short time gave value
less evidence when compared to the teS-
timony of the laymen who testified
after long acquaintance with the pris-
oner. They had business relations with
the defendant. hence their ability to
tell their opinions of the defendant.
The single tax witnesses took the posi-
ton that Prendergast was insane be-
cause of his advocacy of certain relig-
i0uS topics at times. The brothers of
the church said that they thought the
defendant insane because of his advo-
cacY of single tax. There you are. One
side arrayed against the other. and
what does the evidence amount to?''
Reviewing the testimony of the man
from whom the prisoner had borrowed
money. he said:
Il think it would not be unfair to
christen this boy borrower of money
from habit. There is no evidence that
he paid any of his debts. but still he
contracted others. And there is no evil
dence that he was the pet of the family,
as my friend Wade so eloQuentlY and
feelingly said just before he took his
seat. He never contributed to the en-
joyment OF happiness OF that home. nor
did he contribute penny to its sup
port. When the weather was hot he
SLEPT IN THE BASEMENT,
because it was the coolest place in the
house, and gave free rein TO all his self
ishneSS. This is CLEANED from the tes-
tim0ny of his mother. And in that con-
nection let it be remembered that there
shall come from me. neither now nor i'll
the future, any word of denunciation
OF criticism Of that mother. However
recreant the son may have been.
whatever heartburningS he may
have caused her, that mother
never forgot that he was her son. Nor
shall criticise the brother. John. al
though he was plainly caught i'll state
ment which had i'll il no element of
truth. In reference to the medical
testimony, | Will only say this: There
are many parallels in the case of
Prendergast and the case of Charles J.
Guiteau. The mention of the Guiteau
case has appeared as nightmare to the
gentlemen of the other side. But the
incidents in the life of the Ole man are
but repetition of the history of the
other. Both sought the blaze of pubic
notoriety. Both lenged TO be foremost
in the public gaze and in the public
mind. Some men are born to be misers.
to pile up shining gold. They imperiI
their lives and liberty, their reputa-
tiOnS
ARE LONG SINCE FLED.
"Some aspire 10 political eminence,
some with sword OIL hip will brave the
But others long for position of
notoriety, aud of such are these mem
Prendergast and Guiteau. How many
brutal murderers have pressed their
repulsiVe faces against the bars Of the
prison cell, and with outstretched hands
received garlands and bOquetS of flow
ers, placed there by light-minded wom-
en-. But these days are passed; that
incentive to crime is gone. The light
ningS of the press have visited upon
them their vengeance, and those things,
thank God, are known no more. Charles
j. Guiteau declared that he expected
the so-called ''stalWartS" of the Repub-
lican party to applaud his action, and
when he found that they did not, that
they were loudest in their denunciatlon
of his crime. he conceived the idea that
he was directed by God; that he re-
celved divine command to remove the
president. and that it was the eye of
God which flashed over the cleaning
barrel of that pistol from which sped
the bullet
THAT SHOCKED A WORLD.
"When Prendergast committed the
murder he at first declared that he ex-
pected the press to support him and
Justify his act, as he was working for
the elevation of the tracks. But when
he found that the press denounced him
for his murderous act, he suddenly de-
clareG that he had received a call of his
conscience to remove Mayor Harrison.
There is the parallel, marvellous
throughout the entire case. You, gen.
tIemen of the jury, have your own ideas
regarding the sanity of the prisoner.
Leaving out of consideration the words
employed by the experts, paranoiac and
kindred phrases, at the time he shot
II ,<li1
the difference between right and wrong?
That is the test TO apply. The hanging
of Guiteau met with the appreciation of
the entire world, notwithstanding the
declaration of the defense to the con-
Irary. All the evidence of the occur
renceS at the house on the night OF the
shooting show that
HE HAD REASON,
cunning, understanding, intelligence.
When the girl told him TO return in half
an hour ne did so. He reasoned. He
knew what that space of time was. He
returned, and, after shooting the mayor
twice, when the cOachman appeared he
turned the revolver from the breast of
the mayor toward the coachman. He
reasoned. He knew he could keep that
man away by flourlshing that weapon.
He fired shot into the door as he left
to scare the people who started to leave
the house. There is no redeeming trait.
no palliating circumstance connected
with this cold-bloodeG and atrocious
murder. He calls out his victim,
presumably to talk quietly with him.
Then, placing himself so close to his
unarmed victim as to make his aim as
unerring as the decree of fate. he fired
shot AFTER shot into the body of our