The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-01-27
DR.. ROSSB On EPILEPSY
An Insanity Expert Testifes at the
Smell Trial.
The Day Largely Devoted 10 Tits
between Counsel and the AIienist-
in Chief-Witncsscs in RcbuttnI
The Aminbiiity OF the Accused

The Smell trial yesterday Vas devoted TO
expert testimony in behalf Of the defendant
and rebuttal evidence offered by the Gov
eminent on unimportant poinis
The prisoner betrayed symptoms OF
collapse, sitting for an hour in an appar-
ent stupor, motionlcss save for an occa-
sional tremor of the muscles OF the face
and a twitching of those of the hands.
The experts for the defence were exam
ined closely by the Government, the day be-
ing decidedly one of contest between the
| lawyers and the doctors.
The first witness was DR.. Percy Hick-
ling. The defence and prosecution had,
since DR.. Hickling testified on Thursday,
formulated hypothetical questions upon
which they could agree, and these we're b.
each side put to the witnesses on the stand
as experts. The burden of these Questions
was:
The Hypothetical Questions.
Assuming that boy is kicked by mule
in his sixth year. and sustains a fracture
| of the skull as result, that "a a conse-
quence he developes epilepsy ~ the form
known as psychic or masked" and that
! up to his twenty third year he has frequent
! and violent fits OF spasms as a result of
| this pressure on the brain by the fractured,
| skull; that at times he acts as a sane man
and at others is totally devoid of knowl-
edge of his acts; that 10 all appearances he
| Is sane man on a certain day, but that
! liquor has been drunk and that 1t has. as
| has been testified to. had the effect OF I'M
| duly exciting him and tending to bring
! an epileptic seizure; assuming that he has
| called at the house OF a friend, has greeted
| him pleasantly, and has moment later
| been subjected TO violent nervous strain
! by a charge brought by the mother of
| young girl of a heinous crime against her
daughter, and that Immediately after this
! charge the man enters the room where that
girl is sleeping and kills her by cutting her
| throat, assuming all these hypothe ses TO be
| true. what in your opinion Is the condition
/ of mind Of that man? Is he sane or is he
| insane?
The foregoing embodies the elements of
the questions as put to the witnesses by
/ the defence, and those of the prosecution
contained like lines in every respect, save
| that the assumption went on TO say that
III this man, after the killing of that child.
| left the scene OF the crime in a natural
manner, was chased by the father of the
dead child, accused of the crime. and ad-
mitted II, at the same time threatening
the life OF the father would you say that
that man was sane or insane?''
When Mr.. Turner first put the question
OF the defence TO Dr. Hickliig., on the
stand, the reply Was:
He was suffering from epileptic in
sanity, l should say, and was, OF course,
insane at the time
Would such man have normal
mind?"
The witness replied that such man
might perform the duties of life in a nor
NAL way except in cases of unusual excite
ment, when epileptic fits would probably
result, during which period the sufferer
would be an insane man.
On discrimination by Mr.. Gould. the
witness was asked if Smell had known
that the doctor was AT the jail TO examine
him as a factor to this trial, and the wit
ness said that he Presumed that the '!e-
PENDANT did know that to be a fact. Mr.
Turner was present during the examination
at the Jail. MIR. Gould went into the yari-
Gus symptoms Of epilepsy and their ef
fects upon the nerve centres.
The witness said that the motor nerve
centres were the most readily suscepti-
BILE TO the disease in question, and said
that he had not used the ophthalmoscope in
his examination OF Smell. because he did
not feel II TO be necessary The diff
ference in the measurements in SHELLS.
case were gone into. Mr.. Gould asking
II the muscles would not have been small
er on one side than on the other If the
man used one side more.
Certainly, replied the witness. but
regard the fracture Of the skull and its
infringement on the brain as having been
responsible for the partial paralysis of the
man and the consequent impairment OF the
cell . h. cid # 4yGf
The witness said that a man who
4 had for nine years performed difficult
! duties, and. then. after a lucid interval,
I had committed a great crime. following
I which mental stagnation resulted, would
I not necessarily be under the strain Of cpl
| lepsy. When asked by Mr.. Gould II re-
cent injury 10 the head of the defendant
was not a trife, the witness replied:
| There is a surgical maxim which rays
/ that no injury to the head is so slight as
TO be despised.'
Did / understand you to say that in
| sanity was an hereditary disease?"
1t is so considered
did you ever see child who was born
insane?''
Il have. II is very difficult to see indI-
cations in infancy Of the disease. Idiocy
| is considered by the authorities as dis
| tinct form OF insanity"
VIII you say. if the defendant had gone
| to his office on that 9Th day Of August and
! had performed his duties and gone home
| and gone TO bed, whether the man was
! sane or insane at that time?"
dangerous To the Community
Il regard that man as at ali times dan
gerous to the community"
Answer the question. DO you regard
| him as sane or insane?"
After a long pause the witness said
Il cannot answer that question with jus
tice to myself in any other way than by
saying that if that man had been brought
| TO me for medical opinion ] would have
| recommended his confinement for lunacy.''
MIR. Gould then asked question which
| Mr.. Turner objected TO as leading the
witness, and addressed the court, say
( ing that the position occupied by the
| Assistant District Attorney, and his long
! experience at the bar. precluded the pos
| sibility of the gentleman being in error as
to The proper procedure in cross eXamina-
ton.
Mr.. Could retorted by saying that he
thought that the gentlemen of the defence,
who had made such careful study of this