Delaware gazette and state journal., 1896-02-27
.FARNHURST MURDER CASE
The Rehearins Of Daniel Brown and
John ]. Swan.
ELEVEN REASONS FOR A RETRIAL
Presented Thursday by the
ACcuSed's Counsel.
THE FULL TEXT OF THE GROUNDS


Mansiaughter.
Andrew 9. Gray and Herbert II.
Ward, attorneys for Daniel Brown and
John j. Swan Thursday filed the follow
ing reasons for new trial:
THAT the verdict was against the
evidence
2-That the weight Of evidence adj
duced in the trial preponderates against
the verdict.
3-That the Jury in their verdict did
not give the defendants the benefit of
the reasonable doubts arising from the
evidence.
A That the verdict is against the
law as laid down by the Court in its
charge to the jury.
5-That during the trial Of said
cause, the State called as one
of its witnesses a certain David
M. NAPLES, to whose competency
as a witness these defendants,
by their counsel, made objection on the
ground of his insanity. That there
upon, these defendants offered proof of
the insanity of said David Nj. NAPLES,
by which it was demonstrated that the
said David NJ. NAPLES was, on the 9TH
day of October, A. d., 1895, the day
when the alleged crime for which these
defendants are charged was alleged to
have been committed, an insane patient
in the Delaware Hospital for the Insane,
and that the said David M. NAPLES
had not down 10 the time of the offer
ing of his testimony as aforesaid, been
discharged from said institution. That
it was further shown by the testimony
of DR. Hiram II. Burton that the said
DIR. Hiram Il. Burton and one DIR.
Joseph Marsh duly committed the said
David NJ. NAPLES TO said hospital on
or about the second day of June, 1895,
as an insane person, and that in the
opinion of the said DIR. Hiram Il. Bur
ton dependence could not be placed in
the testimony of said David M. NAPLES
because of such insanity. And it was
further shown by the testimony of DIR.
John ii. Hammond, assistant superin-
tendent at said hospital, thar depend
ence could not be placed because of
such insanity. in the testimony of said
David M. Waples as to matters which
might have occurred during the time
that said David M. NAPLES was an in
mate of said institution, on account of
the impairment of his judgment and
memory, due to his mental disease.
That the State offered absolutely no
evidence to rebut the testimony of
these witnesses the only other factor
in determining the competency of said
witness being the examination OF said
David M. NAPLES, not under oath, by
the Court That the said David NJ.
NAPLES, having thus proved to have
been insane and mentally incompetent
to observe and testify on the 9th day of
October, 1885, that condition of mind
is presumed by law TO continue until
such presumption is overturned by
competent evidence, and that, there.
fore, the said Court erred in admitting
the said David M. NAPLES to testify
in said cause.
6-That during the trial of said
cause, the State called as one of its
witnesses a certain David NJ. NAPLES,
TO whose competency as witness these
defendants, by their counsel, made OBJ
lection on the ground of his insanity
That thereupon, these defendants
offered proof of the insanity of the SAID
David M. Waples, by which it was
demonstrated that the said David M,
NAPLES, on the 9TH day nf October
1898, the day when the alleged crime
for which the defendants are charged,
was alleged to have been committed,
was an insane patient in the Delaware
State Hospital for the Insane That
the said David M. NAPLES had not,
down to the time of the offering of his
testimony, as aforesaid, been discharged
from said institution, and that it was
further shown by the testimony of Dr.
John ii. Hammond, that tho said
David M. Waples, because of his said
insanity and the necessary degenera-
tion and impairment of his judgment
and memory, was not, on the day when
said testimony was offered, competent
IN fnGfifv no IN t1tf an oh tfrbf
have occurred while he was an inmate
of said institution; that said testimony
was not controverted in any way or to
any degree by any competent evidence,
and that, therefore, the Court erred in
admitting the said David NJ. NAPLES to
testify in said cause
THAT during the trial Of said
cause, the State called as one of its
witnesses a certain David NJ. Waples
to whose competency as witness
these defendants by their counsel,
made objection, on the ground of his
insanity. That tbereupon, these do
PENDANTS offered proof of insanity of
said David NJ. Waples, to which evil
dence as a body these defendants ex-
pressly refer by which it was demon
strated that tho said David NJ. NAPLES
was, on the 9TH day of October, 1895,
which these defendants are charged,
was alleged to have been committed,
an insane patient in the Delaware
State Hospital for the Insane, and
was on the day that his testimony was
offered, incompetent as witness as to
facts which might have occurred
during the time that he, the said
David M. Waples, was an inmate of
said institution, and that, therefore,
the Court erred in admitting that said
David NJ. NAPLES to testify in said
cause
S-That the panel of jurors drawn for
service at the court of oyer and termi-
ner, in and for New Castle county, in
the State of Delaware. at the February
term, 1896, included, among others, a
certain John JaIlaher That the said
John Jallaher did not appear at the
said court, hut that certain John
Gallagher appeared and answered for
the said John Jallaher. That the said
John Jallaher's name was drawn by
the proper officer of tho court as one of
the jury in this cause. That he, the
said John Gallagher in response to
such call for John Jalaher, took his
place as one OF the Jurors in this cause,
although he had never been summoned
as juror or called in any way; and