The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-01-20

| 49, -. ~ ~ sr.E -" ses~~ "vNNv
upon the facts. Il IA insisted that tn,
4 insanity OF defendant Is ehown in IN Ger,
tain incidents In his life. ts) insanity Il
his family, tS> the act or homicide itsel
and ~ want az motive. and they will b,
considered in this order
The principal witnesses who testified q
Incidents in his life supposed to indieat,
insanity We're his two hrvthers and Rcv
DR. Ssncot, who is warm friend of III,
family. Tho brothers gave instances ol
his taking money from their store when
he was employed by thcm committing fof.
gerios aud entertainments, aud lack OF al.
. lection for them and their parents. but Il
Is plain that while such conduct ON the
| part OF n brother and son may b. unusual,
| u is not trfrcoucnt or necessarily indica-
tive OF an unsound mind; and II Is sign,ti
cant that neither 81 the brothers testified
| that he was IN their opinion. inssnc.
though one Of them said: II have come 10
| tho conclusion that he was little off
for several yt~trs past DR. Smocs tesu-
fled to an instance of cruelty 10 a rabbit
| when a child. and to several instances OF
! deceit. MisehooA and peculatiun, hut ho
admitted, and II is obyious, these do not
| prove insanity. In fact. these incidents in
| his life. rs evidences OF insanity may
| be dismissed, because any suggestion PRIOR
| 10 the murder that defendant was Insane
would hayc been justly regarded as absurd,
nr. Mclaughlin, his family physician, tess
| titled; II have never during my inter-
course With defendant noticed amy evil
dence OF insanity. and had not and would
never have expected H." and DR. Smupt
himself said ~ no did not kill his wife
and children. then would not ray he WAS
of an unscund mind"
Proof OF the insanity OF members Of the
family of defendant is only admissible in
evidence when some evidence has been
gwen that tho defendant himself has
shown signs NJ his avn insanity.
tBuswcli on Insanity, Sec, 23S; . Law
sons Criminal notcnsus. S6iSl
Testimony on the question OF Insanity III
defendants family wsus admitted however.
probably IN abundance OF caution. and That
OF consequence related TO his mother and
maternal grandfather All the eyidrmse
ndduco,i with reference 10 the insanity OF
his mother Is purely hcarsay. although
throughout the time covered by the tests
muny she resided III Austin, and ~ 20 the
effect that just previous 90 the birth of 'ic-
PENDANT She wns ne times Insane, requiring
restraint and watching, The testimony u
DIR, T. y. Wootcn, which Is not eontro-
verified disroscs OK this contention: "No-
men are at times affected with u form CT
insanity al pregnancy, hut there Is t.oth-
ing unusual about this form pf pregnant
insanity and Il does not affect the cliild.n
ON tho subject OF tho insanity OF his ma
tefnal grandfather DR. Smoot testified that,
DIR. Burt told me that his wifc's father,
the grandfather OF defendant. had been adj
judged insane and was confined IN q luna.
tic asylum In Georgia.
Or. Taiicy a cousin Of defendant. tcs'l-
fled TO the same effect This testimony IL
illustrates Tho loosvness OF all the testimony
In la. ux..a .tshN M tnN DtRtt
of defendant. AS matter OF fact. the
grandfather was never adjudged insane,
and was never confined IN nn asylum
Counsel for defcndant presented the
pardon heard with certificates Of TWO ply
slciens In Georgia one to the effect that
he wns totally deranged'' and tho other
that he WAS at his death In 1883 and for
sevcial years previously IAN imbecile,"
Since the board reported, counsel for de-
PENDANT have submitted an AFFIDAVIT %! q
former ordinary In Hall county Georgia,
that In 1852 n son OF Silas H. Palmour. the
grandfather In question. caused papers In
mnacy to be prepared charging his father
with insanity, hut he was not sent to the
asylum because there was no room FOR that
class of lupatics and the family was able
to have him Dursed and guarded DIR.
Bailey Of Gainesville. Georgia, who certi-
fled, es already stated, that Paimour was
an imbecilo has subsequently, Informed me
in answer 10 an inquiry AK 90 the cause
of insanity that palmuur was "a mono
maniac on the subject OF money, constant
dread OF being swinded out OF II by his
son" The other physician answered that
he did not know the cause Of Palmours
mslady The clerk of the court there In
forms me that while lunacy proceedings
We're begun no judgment was rendered be-
cause OF the want cf room in the Hyiuin
for that class OF insane.
affidavit has been prcgputpH, made
by the grandmother, an aunt and two
unoles OF defendant residing in Georgia,
stating that Phlmour became violently in
sane In 1852 aud remained 80 with a few
lucid Intervals until his death In 1883, ~
my request this matter has been cufafully
investigated since the report OF the board
by a responsible citizen of Georgia, who
reported us follows. 'Silaa u. ralmoGr
resided and died in Dawson county In
jured leg some years before; confined eoipo |
time. Brooded over business until n,ind
became undoubtedly unbalanced. said 10
have attempted suicide. Family did not |
consider him dangerous. Went about ~ |
himself. though for a time had aaeninnt |,
Died rather suddenly from brain trouble. |
probably from Kidneys Physician ~ last |
Illness dead"
OF the collateral kindred mentioned by |
Or. Taliey IN his testimony as being Affect |
ed with epilepsy, only the one at Bartlett. \
clan writes me that he has known him |
for The past eight years; have attended |
him in sickness ms well as his father aud |
sisters during that time. ] have seen no |
evidence OF his being afflicted with cpl |
Iepey at any time. nor have l ever heard |
OF any such affection from any member OF
the family or any one else
reputable and leading citizen OF Bart |
lett writes mo that he has known this |
PARTY for fifteen years, and never heard |
nf him being afflicted with epilepsy" IL ~
evident from this sinfement oil all tho in
formation at hand that the character un1 |
extent OF the mental disorder OF Palnonr
rs uncertain. bih accepting the opinion Of
nr. Bailey, md admitting. for the purpose |
of this paper, that The grandfather wls u
moncananiac laie IN life. II docs not ap-
pear 10 me sufficient for several reasonb
IN Justify interference with thn Judgment |
OF the court, There is no evidence OF Ire |
insanity OF defendant. prc,ermitting for |
the present the insanity alleged 10 be |
- .f.A