Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1900-01-23

in detail what would be shown in behalf of
the defendant
I'VE will look into the life of Smell" said
he. and consider the surroundings of the
family We will find insanity permeating
every branch of the family. from his great
great grandmother down. We will prove
the existence of eighteen or nineteen cases
of insanity IN the family
Coming down to thu defendant" me at
torney went on to say. we will show that
he was subject to infant;le commissions
Then he sustained an injury to the head by
striking on a paling. Later he was kicked
in the head by IA mule. In boyhood he at
tempted to XIII his only brother by shoot
ing him with gun. When the weapon was
wrested from him the defendant fell in a
hit Ten years ago he had very violent
fit Two and half or three years ago. as
the result of little Il ouble on the Bladens-
burg road. for which Smell was in man.
ner responsible. he 81 stained an injury to
the head. a fracture of the leg and was
Otherwise badly beaten.
He has had outbursts of passion next
said Attorney Mitchell. during which he
attempted to kill his wife, his daughter and
ms SON and afterward expressed ignorance
of what had occurred. He was a drinking
man, and had been drinking the night pre-
ced!ng the murder.
IF We succeed in convincing you gentle
men of the jury" Attorney Mitchell con-
Guided. that this killing done by an
irresponsible man We shall expect at your
hands a verdict of not guilty by reason of
Insanity"
the Weisenberger girls in court gave way
to tears.
SMELLS Parents On the Stand.
The defense first called Mr.. b. W. Smell.
the father of the defendant. The witness
stated that he is siXty-eight years of age
and is a resident of Washington county,
Ga. An examination of Mr.. Smell to bring
to light the history of his ancestors was
begun. Assistant United States Attorney
Gould promptly entered objection. stating
that insane actions on the part of the de
PENDANT must be established before family
history could be introduced to show that
ancestors of the defendant We're insane.
long discussion enSued. The court at
length sustained the objection. and Mr.
Smell was excused for the time being. He
was followed the stand by his wife,
Mrs. NJ. A. Smell. the mother of the defend
ant
Mrs. Smell was examined fully. giving in
detail the various incidents in the life of
her son. who. she said. is forty-two years
OF age. She then recited that he mad fits
when he was from one to six years Old:
that he sustained an injury to the head.
was kicked by a mule: that at times he
would froth al the mouth: that he attempt
ed to kill his brother. that he had violent
headaches. saying in connection erewlth
that he thought his head would xii! him,
and that on one occasion his fit was such
that he had TO be locked up.
Her Opinion Admitted.
Mrs SHELL asked counsel. from the
circumstances you have described in court.
what have you to say to your sons men
tai condition up to nine years ago.?
The government objected. holding that
Mrs. Smell was not qualified under the cir
Cunlstances to give such an opinion. and
lengthy debate followed. The court over
ruled the objection. saying that the ques-
ton ought To be answered the members of
the jury to give to the answer such weight
as they might see fit
Mrs. Smell answered the question by say
ing: He was insane a times.
After recess the government announced
that Mrs. Smell would not be cross-exa NJ
ined The defense thereupon called Ralph
Daniels. an enlisted man in the United
States army. For three years prior to six
months ago. Daniels testified. he had been
in the company of Smell almost constantly.
The razor shown in court identified by
the witness as that which carried con-
stanty by Smell in lieu OF pocket knife.
ION one occasion. Daniels said further.
Il was at Smells house. in company with
twelve or fourteen other young people.
Without warning. Mr.. Smell grabbed me and
choked me severely. His eyes were flash
ing and he was shaking.
When the defense attempted to show by
the witness that i'll referring to the fore
going assault Smell said he remembered
nothing OF it, the government objected. An
other long argument followed, during which
Attorney Turner declared that the test of
ep:lepsy-the contention being that Smell is
a victim of epileptic insanity--is uncon-
sciousneSs The objection was sustained
objection Sustained.
State whether or no; the next time You
saw him, a day or two later as you have
stated, he knew OF the occurrence"
Di-niels was n@<t asked.
Objection was entered by Mr. Gould on
the ground that the witness could not an
swer the question unless he was psychol
ogist, mesmarist OF possessed of occult
powers. Another long discussion ensued
and the court sustained the objection.
Counsel then asked:
When vol saw Smell after this occur
renee did he appear to have any recollec-
ton OF it,?
Objection to the question was oyerruled
and the witness replied
He did not
Daniels related several incidents that he
thought tended TO show that Smell is of UNI
sound mind
On cross-examir alton it developed that
Daniels. the 10Th instant. married Blanche
Smell. the defendants daughter.
The witness admitted that two pocket
knives and an awl SHOWN in court had been
seen by him in Shells possession.
John Reipilnger. an agent of the Wash
il ston Humane Society. the next witness.
said the morning of the murder he saw
Smell at No Q police station about il
O'Clock Smell mad the appearance OF being
Intoxicated. He did not seem to realize. or
die not care TO sealize, the position he was
in.
Did you not state to me a week ago."
asked Attorney Mitchell. that Smell had
a wild or dazad appeGrance?'
i do not remember 81 wing that" replied
the witness. Il did say. however, that he
was either drunk or crazy.
The next TO take the stand was Blanche
l.. Daniels. SHELLS daughter, who. though
married does not appear to be more than
thirteen or fourteen years of age. She told
of the time Lizzie Weisenbergcr was at
her home.
She slept with me said the witness,
and was treated as nicely / was. She
was regarded as enc OF the family
when did she leaVf your house, asked
counsel
Last Decoration day was the reply.
COntradicts Prosecuting Witness.
Did you see her after she left?'
'Oh. yes. number OF times"
What was her demeanor toward you?'
she was friendly she always had