The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-04-10
ON HYPNOTIC MURDER.
Chief Justice Horton Protests
Against the Inference
DRAWN FROM THE DECISION

Tn the sumner County CaSe-HypnO-
tism Had Nothing to Dc With the
Decision says Justice Horton.
Chief Justice Albert Fl. Horton of the
Kansas supreme court says there is
general misunderstanding about what
the supreme court decided in the Ander
son Gray hypnotic murder case.
Judge Horton in explaining the posi-
ton of the court in this case said
The editorial comm ants ] in the JOUR-
NAL of Monday evening concerning the
decision of the supreme court in the
case of Anderson Gray charged with
the murder of Thomas Patton on the
9th of May, 1894, in Sumner county, con-
tains very much of transformation. The
writer states:
The supreme court has established a
dangerous precedent in acquitting
man who committed murder and con-
victing a man who is supposed to have
told him to do it. 1t is the beginning of
a long series of similar cases. Hyp-
notism will be the favOrite plea of muir
derers hereafter. It is better than in
sanity, for that might send them to the
asylum. Since decisions in the lower
courts are more frequently rendered on
presidents established by the supreme
court than on law and evidence, it is not
markable opinion.
''The facts in the Gray case. briefly
told, are as follows: Thomas Mcdonald
worked in a restaurant in Wichita when
Anderson Gray met him and hired him
in 1894, to work on his farm near Con-
way Springs. Mcdonald had been mar
ried but very short time and his wife
accompanied him and both lived in
| Gray's home. Thomas Patton was
neighbor of Gray's and he was a very
i'm portant witness against him in a case
that involved considerable property. 1t
would be to the advantage of Gray if
Patton were dead and buried.
AFTER a short time Gray whispered tc
Mcdonald that Patton was traducing the
character of Mrs. Mcdonald, and one
! day Patton and Mcdonald had
personal quarrel. Gray told Nc
| Donald that when Patton met him
again he would kill him, that he was
! bad man and had killed several people,
and advised Mcdonald to kill him on
sight He cleaned up his gun and pro-
ceeded to drill Mcdonald in target prac-
tice by putting up mark and having him
shoot at it. Mcdonald knew nothing
about fire arms, while Gray was a dead
shot. Mcdonald fired at the target and
missed it, but Gray told him to try again.
After some practice Mcdonald was able
to hit the mark every time
ION the 9Th of May, 1894 Patton and
Mcdonald had an alteration at Gray's
residence. A short time after Patton
left, Mcdonald went into Gray's
house, where he had con-
versation in which Gray stated
to Mcdonald that if he (McDou-
ald) did not kill Patton, Patton would
| kill him. Gray then procured gun and
gave it with some cartridges to Melon
aid; he told him to go to the grove,
| short distance from the house, where he
would meet him. Soon afterwards he
| did meet Mr.. Mcdonald in the grove,
| placed him in ambush on the south ST lie
and about fifty yards from the east end
of the grove at place whore he could
command view of the road along which
| Patton would come and left him there ia
ambush with the direction to shoot Pat
ton when he approached. Just before
Gray left Mcdonald in the grove. Patton
was seen approaching. Gray directed
Mcdonald to make sure thing of it,
and if he missed to run for the house.
Immediately after Gray left, Patton
came in view and Mcdonald thereupon
fired the fatal shot After firing the shot
Mcdonald returned to Gray's house
"PattOn lived some eleven hours after
the shooting, when he died.
"McDonald and Gray were subse-
quently arrested, charged with the muir
der of Patton. They had separate trials
in Sumner county. The jury acquitted
Mcdonald and, subsequently, when Gray
was tried, he was found guilty of MUIR
der in the first degree and sentenced to
be hung. The Mcdonald case was not
brought to the supreme court and that
court had nothing whatever to do with
his acquittsl. The Gray case was
brought to the supreme court for
review. There was no hypnotism
commented upon or referred to either
in the record or in the argument
''The supreme court merely decided
that as Gray suggested, advised, and as
sisted Mcdonald in the murder of Pat
ton, he was guilty as charged, and
further decided that there was no mate
rial error in the record, and affirmed the
conviction. Whether Mcdonald was
properly prosecuted or not the supreme
court has no information one way or the
other. If the same evidence had been
presented against Mcdonald as was pre-
sented in the Gray case, the supreme
court would have without hesitation, il
it had the power, ruled that he was also
guilty of murder in the first degree The
acquittal of Mcdonald seems to have
been miscarriage of justice; but with
that acquittaI the supreme court had
nothing 10 do in any way.
I'm affirming the conviction of Gray,
no new doctrine was announced and nc
new rule of evidence established. Hyp-
notism was not considered or ruled upon
in any way. The reports thereof are
wholly unfounded.
1.-THE statute of this state provides
that any person who counsels. aids Oh
abets in the commission of any offense
may be charged. tried and convicted il
the same manner as the party who com
mits the offense. This statute was ap
plicable to the Gray case and the supreme
court held upon the evidence disclosed
that he was properly convictsd-this ant
: nothing more"