The record-union., 1896-04-17
Is SIMON RA4EN INSANE?
Physicians Give Their Opinion to the
Effect That he Is.
But District Attorney Ryan Thinks
When They Hear the States Evi-
dence They Will Change.


After the roll Of the jury summoned
TO pass ON Raten's sanity was called
yesterday, Judge Hinkson said that
the arguments presented the night be-
for did not involve the question before
the court. He understood the rule to be
In an inquiry like this that the examin-
alton might inquire into all conditions
Of the mind. 1t had been objected that
no man could know the actual condi-
ton of mans knowledge, and could
only give an opinion The only Ques-
tion in his mind was whether it was a
competent test in any instance for the
expert to give his opinion on the Ques-
tion.
District Attorney Ryan said the
question was as Mr.. Hart stated 1t last
night, as to Raten's present sanity,
and the defendants understanding was
q factor in it.
The court thought that after the ex-
pert had given his testimony, it would
be eminently proper to ask him the
question. His answer could only be an
opinion, anyway. He should overrule
the objection and admit the testimony.
The question as to whether, in his
opinion, Raten knew the difference
between right and wrong was asked
of Dr. Hoisholt again, and he an
swered, after some hesitation, that
from his conversation with Raten he
thought he did.
Mr.. Johnson objected, on the ground
that the only question was as to
whether Raten was now insane or not.
j. w. Hughes, also Of Raten's coun-
sci, argued to the same effect.
The court thought the knowledge Of
right and wrong one Of the elements of
insanity and to be investigated. He
therefore overruled the objection. He
thought it was proper to go into all the
elements that go to make up insanity,
in order that the jury might judge
A. L. Hart argued at length on the
line pursued by him the night before,
that, if the defendant We're insane, he
was not able to defend himself or tes-
tify intelligently, and therefore the law
protected him from being tried while
in that condition. The expert could not
look into his mind and see whether he
could distinguish between right and
wrong.
The court said that he could no more
look into the mans mind and tell
whether or not he was dangerous, and
yet the law provides for that fact The
jury is no more bound to accept the
experts testimony as to defendants s
ability to distinguish between right and
wrong than to accept his other conclu-
sions He was convinced still that his
ruling was right in admitting the tes-
timony.
After the noon intermission the ques-
tion by the court as to whether Dr.
Hoisholt thought that, If a robbery or
murder had been committed by de-
fendant, he thought he would know
whether it was right or wrong, was an
swered by him that he thought he
would
Mr.. Johnson excepted.
The doctor then went into a minute
explanation of the scientific reasons he
had for thinking the defendant insane
The picture Of insanity, so to speak,
was incomplete, and therefore he could
not be positive that Raten was insane
Mr.. Ryan asked if, in the case OF a
person who had the delusion that the
Government owed him some money
and fell in with a couple Of men and
travels with them for some time, and
for some reason he commits murder
klHlng one or DOln or them, II, in that
case, the witness would consider him re-
sponsible for the murder
Witness answered that, unless the
particular act is connected with the de-
lUsion that he carries in his mind, he
thought he was responsible He thought
from his own personal knowledge,
based on interviews with Raten, that
he may be conscious that this proceed
ing was for the purpose Of determining
his sanity. He was in some doubt on
that point, however. He thought that
he was sane enough to consult intelli-
gently with his counsel. The peculiar
run of defendants mind on the money,
however, inclined witness to think it
might cloud his intelligence.
He thought that, If defendant was
called on to plead innocent or guilty. he
would have enough intelligence to enter