Evening star., 1894-04-12
SlASHER WAS GUILTY
The Jury Took No Stock in the
Insanity Theory.
ANOTHER CASE TAKEN UF
Four Indictments Combined and
Taken Up at Once.
LONG SENTENCE PROBABLE

This morning District Attorney Birney
concluded the case against George TAYLOR,
alias George Jones. the individual who. as
Jack the Slasher" during the past six or
eight months terrorized the people Of the
whole. District. and gained for himself a
name and reputation which will not soon
be forgotten. The prisoners appearance
and actions today differed not a whit from
those which characterized him during the
two preceding days of the trial, sitting with
bowed head, blinking eyes, and twitching
lips, never once raising his eyes from the
moor or uttering a word. Again was the
court room crowded, standing room being
at premium, and not a few women being
among those who sought to gaze upon the
man whose acts had been discussed in
every household in the District for months
In MS argument before the jury Mr. Bir-
ney said the question for them TO determine
was not whether the prisoner was or was
not OF sound mind, for he conceded that the
man was not Of sound mind But not all
men lacking sound minds were irrespons-
ible in law for their unlawful acts The
question at issue in the present case was as
10 the capacity of the prisoner 10 know
right from wrong-that is whether the man
had sufficient capacity 10 know, when he v as
engaged in his acts OF robbery and destruc-
ton, that he was doing wrong The man
might be a crank but crankiness was not
an excuse for crime They were numerous
| enough now in the country and to acouit
one on the ground Of his being a crank
would be 10 license innumerable dangerous
| persons. Mr.. Birney then briefly discussed
| the testimony in the case. contending that
| the jury could reach but one conclusion In
| the matter. and that was that the man.
while of low Intelligence. fully knew that he
was committing a wrong in entering Mr..
HOLLANDS house, and. therefore. should be
| convicted
The Judges Charge.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Birney's argu-
ment Judge Cole delivered a most elabo-
rate charge to the jury, in which he said,
after explaining the charge in the indict-
ment housebreaking. that il was con-
ceded that the prisoner did break and enter
the house of Mr.. Holland on the early
morning of the Sth of last month and that
he carried away from the house certain
/ property of Mr.. Holland. Therefore, ex-
| plained Judge Cole, the only question TO be
determined was. had the prisoner mind
enough at the time to form the intent to
/ steal? IL the jury believed that he did have
mind enough TO form such an intent a YER
dict of guilty should be returned. but IL
the jury had a reasonable doubt in the
matter they should acquit the prisoner
| The law, said Judge Cole, presumed a man
\ to be sane, and the burden was on the de-
fendant to prove otherwise In reaching
their conclusion the jury should take into
consideration the appearance of the man
In connection with the testimony on both
/ sides.
The Insanity Plea.
The plea Of insanity, remarked Judge
/ Ccle. was a valid one, although the Jury
should be careful to rot let that plea i'm
! pose upon them in one way or the other.
4 The plea had often been feigned, and the
question. then. was. was the prisoner feigningf
| The term insanity was a broad one and
experts had said that very few men were
/ not insane. BY that was meant that very
many persons had not perfect minds. Minds
might be abnormal and imperfect to a
great extent, but those conditions did not
always render the afflicted persons inca
pable OF distinguishing between right and
wrong. Insanity which excused criminal
| acts was rarely of sudden occurrence. So,
one of the questions in the prisoners case
I To be answered was, was the insanity of the
prisoner II he was insane a sudden occur
renee? That is. was he insane previous 20
/ or at the time Of his unlawful act
IL, said Judge Cole, the jury reached the
conclusion that the man now felgning.
| they should find whether in determining TO
/ feign insanity, he exercised reason. While
the opinions of experts were entitled TO
| more weight than those of laymen, the opin-
ion Of neither were to be considered as con-
| elusive. the jury being the sole judge in the
/ matter. Partial insanity was no excuse for
! crime. unless the criminal act held the iela-
tion thereto Of cause and effect In this
] Connection Judge Cole read at length the
/ instructions given the jury by Judge Cox in
the Guiteau case. explaining that the true
test was. did the defendant know at the
| time OF committing the crime that he was
/ doing that which was wrong?
The Guiteau Case.
! Neither, explained Judge Cole was a
perverted moral condition of mind an ex-
cuse for crime. and the judge again read
| from Judge CoN's charge to the jury in
the Guiteau case TO the effect that indif-
ference to what is right was not insanity,
/ full acts. The wanton destruction by the
prisoner OF goods taken by him was not
| inconsistent with the theory that he was
| conscious that he was doing wrong. An
other question to be determined, said Judge
| Cole. was whether the slashing OF goods
was the result Of an insane impulse or
the acts OF a wicked mind.
| In conclusion. Judge Cole impressed again
| fact TO be determined by them was. had
| the prisoner at the time he committed the
| act the mental capacity 10 know that he
was doing wrong. The jury had nothing
whatever TO do with the consequences re-
sulting from their verdict. either to the
prisoner or to the community.
Guilty ne Indicted.
The jury retired at II :45, and at 1920 re-
turned a verdict OF guilty as indicted on
the second count of the Indictment, that is,
| breaking into Mr. Hollands house in the
night time The prisoner heard the rendi-
tion of the verdict with the same seeming
| Indifference which he assumed during the
whole trial But, as he was taken from
| the court room to the prisoners cage below,
| followed by a curious crowd, he frightened
| up considerably, and a smile OF relief
| spread over his features
| The maximum penalty for the oTense of
| which The Slasher' stands convicted is
| ten years at hard labor IN the penitentiary,
| and Il Is safe to conclude that he viii get
the extreme penalty. There are four other
| indictments pending against the man, and
/ II is not at all improbable that pleas OF
guilty will result in those Of them which
/ may be called, so that Jack" will prob
| ably go TO the penitentiary for a much
| longer term than ten years.
! one Of the jurors in the case stated TO a
/ Star reporter, after the rendition Of the
! verdict that the jury had no difficulty
! whatever I'm reaching their verdict CT
/ guilty, taking not the slightest stock in the
! contention OF the prisoners counsel that
| the man was insane.
Another Trial.
After the conviction today OF Jack on
the first OF the five indictments returned
| against him, District Attorney Birney de-
cided to consolidate the remaining four in
dictmens and to proceed at once to the trial
| -. a,