The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-01-19

chief "and told him that I had been
| informed Of his previous good charac-
ter and felt that 1 would like to show
him some cOnsie Tation under the cir
/ cumstances. / felt sympathy for him
| on account of his previous good char
acter. That he must have some motive
/ for doing what he had done.
Il told him he was a self-confessed
/ criminal, guilty of one Of the most
I heinOus of crimes, and we did not feel
/ justified under these circumstances il
! dealing with him any differently than
I with any other criminals who had
/ come before US. but If he would make
/ SOME statement justifying his act prob
/ ably we would feel justified in showing
/ MIN some"
Objection By Powers.
Judge Powers arose and said: '"Thfs
, is clear instance where a promise is
/ held out to a man under charge Of
/ crime by the chief Of police, to induce
/ him to make some statement in regard
/ to his defense. 1 insist the court should
/ stop SUCH testimony"
I'VE are offering it 10 show the state
/ Of Mr.. Mills mind at the time" said
/ Mr.. Putnam
The court said that this being the
/ case, the witness might so on with his
/ answer, and ne continued with the
/ words some consideration" Mills said
/ to him: If I should make a statement
/ to YOU. would you use il against me?'
and / told him on my word and honor
+ as gentleman and an officer l would
not use 1t against him. and just at that
/ time we were Interrupted and there
+ was no further conversation on that
f -]Cint."
suppose you had succeeded in OBJ
tanning something discriminating from
+ this man by the indUcement you held
I out and by your promise not to use it
/ against him, what would you ha1.
done if you had been placed on the
/ witness stanc2' asked Judge Powers.
I would not have used it.
/ DR.. Samuel Hughes testified that he
I had practiced his profession about
I twenty years and had had more or less
experience with nervous diseases. He
had about six months experience in at
I tending an asylum in Scotland. IN the
/ last two years supposed he had exam
ined in the neighborhoOd Of thirty or
forty alleged insane people
He didn't know the defendant Mills:
had seen him in the court room; he
was in the court room the latter part
of the time he was teStifying on the
witness stand. a hypothetical question
substantially the same as that pro-
pounded by Judge Powers the day be-
fore was read TO the witness and he
was asked whether. assuming the facts
TO be true. he would consider the per-
son described sane OF insane at the
time he fred the shots that killed J. c.
'Melveney. He replied Il don't think
he was insane" He thought Mills was
able Of Distinguishing between right
and WrOus at the time he did the
shooting, and that he was able at that
time TO control himself
Under crcss-examindti0n he said that
he was summoned as a witness in this
case UVO days before. He mad made no
invezl. gation of the facts In the case
only in The court room. He formed his
opinion as TO MEls' sanity upon the facts
cont1lEed in the statement read to him
and upon his knowledge Of medicine. He
didn't think that all summer Mills had
been wei man OF that he WAS a welt
man now.
On redirect examination he was asked
to define confessional insanity and said II
was characterized by witness Of move
ments of the body and also w-ildness of
movements of the mind Preparation and
de1bar ration were generally inconsistent
with this form of insanity. There were
periods Of stupOr and Quietness. as a
rule. A man might appear TO be sane for
a few moments and the next moment be
the very reverse of sane.
Dr.. King On the Stand.
DIT. J. c. z. King, the health officer.
was called and testified that ne had been
engaged in the practice Of medicine for
ten years Counsel for The. prosecution
STARTED 70 read the hypothetical question
to him. but at Judge Powers suggestion
deSisle1. handed The typewriter question
90 him and asked If be had read it, He
answered that he had. and when asked as
70 ms opinion regarding the sanity or in
sanity of the subject az the time of the
homicide. replied II think il was the act
I of "a sane man under prOvOcation.'
In cases of post fe0rile insanity the
nerve centers are affected by the disease;
a person suffering from IL is less able to
GO anything mentally than d well person .
u IS more apt 20 affect tne memory than
any other faculty of the mind and people
get in a stare Of inertia where they want
10 sit and do nothing.
The acts and conduct of the defendant
on the day Of the tragedy showed that he
/ had control over himself and he was not
insane at thar time. He didn't know Of
any act that he committed uTat dav THAI
couldnt have been done just as we'll by q
sane man.
DO you think Mills was sane?" asked
Judge Powers.
Yes, he was sane, but he was jusd-
fed"
The state rested its case. and the argu-
mcnt of the prosecution was proceeded
with by Ray Van Cot who gave the
statement Of the cltse substantially as
follows:
Argument of Van Colt.
The defendant in this case is charged
with the crime Of murder in the first de-
gret chat on the Sd day Of October. 1898.
IN t.sss county and this state he un5avv-
fully wilfully, premed tatedly. deliberate
ly arl1 malclOuslE killed John G. O Mel
Veoey- / think YOU are satisfied of the
one fact That the defendant killed John
G. O.Melyeney. the prosecution has
proven chat beyond a doubt. and the de-
1enaeut. when he was upon the stand.
admitted that fact also.
50 the question resolves itself into
THIS Was the defendant justified. or
looking at the question in the light Of his
defense, was he insane2f
Let us look. then, for the time being
al the evidence introduced by the state
as TO the manner IN which this killing
took place" NJ. Van Colt then reviewed
briefly the evidence in regard to the acts
OF the defendant on the day of the hOmi-
cioe. lie told how the defendant cir
. Tered o MelVeney s office on the day 81
the killing and of the circumstances IN
. connection with 1T; Of mis- telling others
. Immediately afterward what be had
dune and asking for The sheriff 10 be sent
for
He called attention TO the fact that
q MelFeUey made no demonstration what
ever. indicating that he had absolutely
10 fear OF Mills. and said that this showed
that no threats had been made against
him and QisprOVed the conversation which
the defendant had alleged took place az
Eagle Gate.
Inc speaker said The statute OF the
state says that Waen 10 is proved upon
the part OF the prosecution that q hOmi-
eide has been committed II then devolves
upon the defendant 10 prove his justifi-
cation. unless the testimony on the part
o. the prosecution tends TO show the jus
tthcation or excuse To nay mind the
testimony shows a sex purpose OF tsle
part OF Mills 10 Nh that man. He was
not satisfied Wllh shooting once but he
shot three times, lie waited until every
other person but 'OMelVeney had gone
out of the room before he shot never